The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 01-05; CALAVERA HILLS VILLAGE W; REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING; 2004-10-04Coo I ( -V I I - 4 .7 7 4 7. I 2 1 I 1 4 II 2 ( , I I' . -'V.'. ••V '. V Vt 7' 7 . . V' 1 -. ,I -V V. 7 V VV .V V•V .V 7'.. I I V •_ . IY V •• VV' 'V' V. V' •__ -,• • • V.-, -- 1 ,, 1 - 7. '1 4 1 . Geologic ' Enwonmentai 4 TT'T I I - - •.;;.- -, -' -. ,_ -- fl . I I ' Gotechnical Geologic Environmental 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad California 92008 • (760) 438 3155 • FAX (760):931-0915 October 4,,:2004 ••-..,. to w 0 3459-B1SC Calavera Hills II, LLC - 2727 Hoover Avenue ' National City, California 91950 - { Attention Mr Don Mitchell Subject Report of Rough Grading, Calavera Hills, Village W, Building Lots 1 through 114 and Recreation Lots 115 and 117, Carlsbad Tract 01-05, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California r .Dear Mr. Mitóhell: .5 . S .. 31 This report presents a summary of the geotechnical testing and observation servic's prided by GeoSoils, Inc (GSI), during the rough earthwork', construction p ov hase of ' development at the subject site Earthwork commenced in January 2003, and was generally completed in May 2004 I .1 PURPOSE OF EARTHWORK - The purpose of grading was to preparereiatively level pads for the construction of 114 residential structures, two recreation lots, and access roadways Cut-and-fill grading and drill-and-shoot blasting techniques were utilized ,,to attain the desired graded configurations Cut lots and the cut portion of transition lots were overexcavated in order Ito provide for more uniform foundation support Existing Iopsoils and colluvium were removed to suitable bedrock material and recompacted The grading plan for this portion of Calavera Hills II, Village W, prepared by O'Day Consultants, dated December 4, 2003, is included with this report as the base map(s) for Plates 1 through 4 41 . ..- 7 I - EARTH MATERIALS Subsurface geologic conditions exposed during the process of rough grading were, observed by a representative of GSI Earth materials onsite generally consist of dense granitic/metavolcanic rock With ,La thin, discontinuous surficial veneer of topsoil/colluvium IFL Il - 1- I --,.' V'5 --j -.- - .. r, •-. . '.. .7 -.5. .'.f. fl 5.5.514 Dense surficial outcrops of granitic/volcanic bedrock were noted throughout the area. Cut slopes, constructed into dense bedrock, were observed to expose dense,'fractured or jointed g ran itic/metavolcanic rock Fractures/joints were generally observed to be high angle (i.e., greater than 45 degrees), oriented predominantly northwest and northeast. Bedrock structure is generally consistent with the findings presented in GSI (1 998c, 1 998c and 2001) Adverse geologic conditions related to bedrock fractures/joints were generally , not observed GROUNDWATER . -.• . .. . Naturally occurring groundwater was not encountered during rough grading of the building pads and should not significantly affect the proposed building construction, provided that the recommendations contained in this report and/or provided by GSI are incorporated into final design and construction, and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans Based on the fractured and dense nature of the g ran itic/metavolcanic bedrock, perched groundwater conditions may develop in the future due to excess irrigation, homeowner altered drainage, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated Should manifestations of perched conditions (i e, seepage) develop in the future, this office could assess the conditions and provide mitigative recommendations as necessary. A discussion of near surface slope subdrainage is presented in our referenced report on toe drains (GSl, 2003a), and. is considered, applicable .with respect to this site. A discussion ofother -- subdrainage is presented in a later section of this report EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION Earthwork operations have been completed in general accordance with the City of Carlsbad grading ordinance and the guidelines provided in the field by this office Observations during grading included removals, overexcavation, and subdrain construction along with general grading procedures and placement of compacted fills by the contractor. Rough Gradina Preparation of Existing Ground 1 - Deleterious material, such as concentrated organic matter and miscellaneous debris, were stripped from the surface and disposed of beyond the limits of grading for the subject area, prior to placing any fill 1 - - - Caiavera Hills ii, LLC -- - - - •- -. . -- W.O. 3459-B1-SC - - - • • Caiavera Hills il, Village w • • .- • • * - October 4, 2004 • FUe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror • • .,. Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. .. - ... .•. 2: Loose surficial materials (i.e., existing topsoils and colluvium) were removed to expose competent bedrock in all areas to receive fill. 3. " In order to provide for more uniform support of structures, the cut portion of transition lots were overexcavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet below pad grade, then brought to grade with compacted fill. Cut lots 'exposing dense granitic/meta-volcanic rock were overexcavated a minimum of 3, feet below pad . . gradein order to facilitate foundation and utility construction. Generally, an attempt was made to slope the overexcavated bottom toward the street area. Toe drains were constructed along the rear of selected pads in general accordance with GSI. (2003a) 4. In areas where conventional cut and fill grading techniques were not feasible due to rock hardness, drill-and-shoot blasting techniques were utilized These techniques were used where dense, non-rippable rock occurred within a minimum of 3 feet of finished' pad grade, and above local street elevations equivalent to approximately 1 foot below the lowest utility invert elevation. Blasting operations occurred throughout the project.. . .5.. Subsequent to completing removals, areas to receive compacted fill were scarified. to a minimum depth Of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content, and then compacted to attain a minimum relative'compaction of 90 percent. These areas Were then brought to grade with fill compaèted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction 6. All processing of original ground in areas to receive fill, shown on Plates 1'. , through 4,. was observed by a representative of GSI. Fill Placement Fill consisted of onsite and import materials which were placed in thin lifts, approximately, 4 to 8 inches in thickness, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted to attain a minimum 90 percent relative compaction Compaction test results on fills are presented in the attached Table 1. Approximate as-built fill thicknesses are presented in the attached Table 2. The preparation of some .of these materials including processing of shot rock and oversize rock through a rock crusher This process generally produced "6-inch minus" (in one direction) material, in accordance with guidelines presented in GSI Rock fills were generally placed in the vicinity 'of Lots 16 through .25, 45 through 47, 69 through 74, 110 through .115, and 117, and routinelyto no. closer than about 10 feet from finish grade Fill materials generated onsite, or within the larger CalCvera Hills development, from.either raw excavation or produced at the crusher site,' have been placed. in general accordance with recommendations presented in GSI (2002) An additional criteria, developed for this Caiavera Hills ii, LLC . ' . . . ' ' W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills ii Village W October 4 2004 FiI6:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror . . • . . Page 3 • - . GeoSoils, Inc. project during grading, has included gradation testing (in general accordance with. ASTM:D-422) of stockpiled materials produced from the rock crusher. This testing has, been performed in order to evaluate the percentage of "fines" included in the stockpile material. For this project, "fines" are considered to be earth materials that are 3/4 of an inch in diameter, or finer.. Suitable soil fills are considered to consist of earth materials with at least ±40 percent finer'than'/4 of an inch (GSI, 2002 and 2003c). • . 0 ' ' Canyon Subdrains.. , : •• , ,. Prior to placement of fill, canyon subdrains, consisting of 67inch diameter (Schedul 40) PVC pipe, were placed within pre existing canyon areas located in the general vicinity,of . .Lots 15 and 46. The sUbdrain beneathLot15 isthe'cóntinuation of the drain, upgradient, . within the adjacent Village X to the west. Subdrain construction was performed in general ' accordance with GSI guidelines. The approximate locations of canyon subdrains are shbwnon Plates 1 through 4, included with this report. , •. . '. ' ' '' ' Toe Drains . , . , •: , '• ' ' . ' '. . ' ' ' Toe of slope drains were prbvidèd as recommended in GSI (2003a).., The approximate: locations of toe drains are shown on Plates 1 through:4, included with this report. •' ' Slopes. 'Graded Slopes ' ' . . ' ' .' • •, '.. •, ' ' : ' In general, graded slopes constructed under the'purview of this report should perform satisfactorily with respect to gross and surficial stability, provided that these slopes are properly maintained, and are subject to the prevailing semi-arid climatic conditions. Fill ' slopes constructed under the purview' of this, report were provided with a keyway :excavated into suitable bedrock materiai, in general accordance with GSI recommendations. Cut slopes were constructed, using- cut and fill grading technique's and/or blasting, and exposed dense igneous and/or metavolcanic rock: Slope stability was reviewed and evaluated in preparation of GSI (1998b, 1998c, and 2001): Temporary Slopes Temporary (construction slopes, may generally be constructed at 'a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal:vertical [h:v]) or flatter in compacted fill, and 1/2:1 (h:v) in suitable' bedrock. material '(provided adverse geologic structures are not present, as evaluated by GSI prior. to workers entering trenches). Utility trenches may be excavated in accordance with guidelines presented in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations for Excavation, Trenches, and Earthwork with respect to Type B soil (compacted fill) and "stable rock" (bedrock). Construction'materials and/or-stockpiled soil should. not be stored within 5 feet' Calavera Hills II, LLC ' 0 • • ' W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village W ' ' - 0 ' October 4, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror '• ' ' 0 • • 0 ' • ' • • Page 4 • '. . ' ' • GeoSoils, Inc. , •,• •••• • ' •0, from the top of any temporary slope Temporary/permanent provisions should be made to direct any potential runoff away frorn.the top of temporary slopes. Natural Slopes Natural slopes should generally perform satisfactorily with respect to gross and sürticial stability, provided our recommendations are followed and they are subjectto the prevailing semi-arid climatic conditions An analysis of natural slope stability has been completed under separate cover (GSI, 1998b, 1998c, and 2001) Field Testing 1 Field density tests were performed using the sand cone method (ASTM D-1 556) and nuclear. method (ASTM D-2922) Tests taken for the entire Calavera Hills project were taken in consecutive numerical order. Only the test results for Village W are presented in Table 1 at the end of this report The approximate locations of field density tests are shown on the Field Density Test Location Maps, Plates 1 through 4, which utilize the 40-scale grading plans (sheets 3, 4, 5, and 6), prepared by O'Day Consultants (2003), as a base map 2 Field density tests were taken at periodic intervals and random locations to check the compactive effort provided by the contractor. Based on the operations observed, test results presented herein are considered representative of the fills observed under the purview of this report 3 Visual classification of the soils in the field, as well as random laboratory testing, was the basis for determining which maximum dry density value to use for a given density test 4. Rock fills were periodically observed using dozer pits in order to evaluate adequate moisture content and relative compaction 5 Testing and observations were performed on a full-time basis LABORATORY TESTING Moisture-Density Relations / The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for each major soil type was determined according to Test Method ASTM D-1557 The following table presents the test results Caiavera Hills II, LLC • • • W.O.3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills II Village W October 4 2004 Ale e \wp9\3400\3459b1 w ror Page 5 GeoSoils, Inc. F .SOIL-TYPE ' '. . MAXIMUM DRY DENSI (pc OPTIMUM MOI$TURE', CONTENT (%) A - Dark Brown, Silty SAND . 120.5 13.0 B - Light Brown Silty SAND . . .-'128.0"10.0 C - Light Brown; Silty SAND . '. 126.0 . .11.0 0 - Light Gray, Silty SAND ... . . . 126.5'-. . 10.5 E - Dark BroWn, Silty GRAVEL .130.0 . 11.0 F - Brown, Sandy GRAVEL (processed material) . . 126.5.. . . 10.5 G -,Brownish Gray; Gravelly SILT . . . 131.0 . . 10.0 I - Brown, Silty SAND w/Gravel (processed material) 134.0 8:5 J - Brown, Silty SAND w/Gravel (processed material) . 134.0 . 8.0. N -Brown,. Silty SAND w/Gravel (processed material) . 136:0 . 8.0. I Expansive. Soils .. . .. . . . ... ...• . . . . - . .' . . . . . Expansive soil conditions have been evaluated for the site Representative samples of soil . near pad grade were recovered for classification and 'expansion testing. Expansion 'Index (E.l.) testing was performed in general accordance with Standard 18-2 of the Uniform ' Building Code ([UBC], International Conference of Building Officials [ICBO];1997). Representative expansion indices indicate that site soils near pad grade, within the subject lots, are very low expansive (E.L <20). A summary of soil expansion results are presented .in the attached Table 2..: Corrosion/Sulfate TestinQ Typical samples of the site materials were analyzed for corrosion/soluble sulfate potential Soil sulfate testing indicates:that Ahe sulfate exposure to concrete, is negligible,', in accordance with Table 19-A of the UBC (ICBO 1997); Site soils are considered corrosive to ferrous materials when wet or saturated. While it is. our understanding that standard concrete cover is sufficient mitigation, alternative methods and additional comments should be obtained from a qualified corrosion engineer .1 Sieve Analysis Sample gradation for Various representative samples was determined in. general' accordance with ASTM Test Method D-422. .Test results generally indicated, that at least 40 percent of each sample was finer than the 3/4-flCh sieve in 'general accordance with GSI (2002 and 2003c) Calavera Hills-111i LLC . . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC' Calavera Hills II, Village W October 4; 2004 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror . . . . . . . , . Page 6' • ', ' . ' . , , . " GeoSoiis; me. • ,. '.. " .. I, RECOMMENDATIONS -FOUNDATIONS. General The foundation design and construction recommendations are basedon laboratory testing and engineering analysis of onsite earth materials by GSI. Minimum recommendations for conventional or post-tension (PT) foundation systems are provided in the following-' sections. The foundation systems may be used to support the proposed structures provided they are founded in competent bearing material.. The proposed foundation systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines contained in the UBC.. All footing designs should be reviewed and approved by the project structural: engineer/foundation designer. Based on soil expansion. potential and, the as-built fill thiOknesses (i.e., differential fill thickness not exceeding 3:1 [maximum to minimum], across the lot), conventional or PT foundations may be constructed Conventional Foundation Design 1 Conventional spread and continuous footings may be used to support the proposed residential structures provided they are founded entirely in properly compacted fill or other competent bearing, material (i.e., bedrock),. Footings should not simultaneously bear directly on bedrock and fill soils 2 Analyses indicate that an allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf)' may be used for design of continuous footings per Table 3, and for design of isolated pad footings 24 inches square and 18 inches deep into properly compacted fill or bedrock The bearing value may be increased by one-third for seismic or other temporary loads This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 12 inches in depth, to a maximum of 2,500 psf. No increase, in bearing, for footing width is recommended 3 For lateral sliding resistance, a 0.35 coefficient of friction may be utilized for a concrete to soil contact when multiplied by the dead load 4 Passive earth pressure maybe computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 pounds per cubic foot. (pcf) with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf; 5 When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance,1the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-third 6 Footings should maintain 'a horizontal distance or setback between any adjacent slope face and the bottom: edge of the footing. The horizontal di ' stance be calculated by using h/3 (where h is the height of the slope) The horizontal setback should not be less than 7 feet, -nor need not be greater than '40 feet (per code) The setback may be maintained by simply deepening the footings Caiavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459B1-SC Calavera Hills ii Village W October 4 2004 Flie e \wp9\3400\3459b1 w ror Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. Flatwork, utilities, or other improvements within a zone of h/3 froth the top of slope may be subject to lateral distortion. Footings, flatwork, and utility setbacks should be constructed in accordance with distances indicated in this section, and/or the approved plans 7 Provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction phase of development, a majority (>50 percent) of the anticipated foundation settlement is expected to occur during construction Maximum settlement is not expected to exceed approximately 11/2 inches and should occur below the heaviest loaded columns.,. Differential settlement is not anticipated to exceed 3/4 inch between similar elements, in a 40-foot span Conventional Foundation/Concrete Slab Construction The following construction recommendations are based on generally very low to low expansive bearing soils and maximum fill thicknesses of less than approximately 30 feet 1 Conventional continuous footings should be constructed in accordance with recommendations presented in Table 3, and in accordance with UBC (ICBO, 1997) guidelines.,All footings should be reinforced per Table 3 2. Detached isolated interioror exterior piers and columns shouldbe founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface and tiedtO the main foundation in at least one direction with a grade beam Reinforcement should be properly designed by the project structural engineer. 3 A grade beam, reinforced as above and at least 12 inches square, should be provided across the garage entrances: The base of the reinforced grade beam. should be at the same elevation as base of the adjoining footings 4 The residential floor and garage slabs should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches, in accordance with Table 3 Concrete used in floor slab construction should have a minimum compressive strength of 2,500 psi 5 Concrete slabs should be underlain With 'a minimum of 4 inches of sand In addition, a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of 1.0-mil, polyvinyl-chloride membrane with all laps sealed, should be provided at the mid-point of the sand layer. The slab subgrade should be free of loose and uncompacted material prior to placing concrete 6 Concrete floor slabs (residence and garage) should be reinforced per Table 3 All slab reinforcement should be supported to ensure proper mid-slab height positioning during placement of the concrete "Hooking" of reinforcement is not an acceptable method of positioning Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills II, Village W: • • • October 4, 2004 File e \wp9\3400\3459b1 w ror Page 8 GeoSoils, Inc. - Presaturation is not considered necessary for these soil conditions; however, the moisture content of the subgrade soils should be equal to, or greater than, optimum moisture to a depth of 12 to 18 inches (depending on footing embedment) below the adjacent ground grade in the slab areas, and verified by this office within 72 hours of the vapor barrier placement. . Soils generated from footing excavations-to be used onsite should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction 90 percent of the laboratory standard, whether it is to be placed inside the foundation peruieter or in the yard/right-of-way areas . This, material must not alter positive drainage patterns' that direct drainage away from the structural areas and toward the street Proposed pools and other appurtenant structures should consider that excavation difficulties and oversize materials may likely be encountered in some lots at depths . greater than approximately .3 feet below existing building pad grades due to the presence of dense granitic,rock, and possibly at thesurface. Please referto Table 2 : for a listing of lots with relatively shallow (i.e., <10 feet) fills ' As an -alternative,. an engineered PT foundation system nay be used. . Recommendations for PT slab design are presented in the following section PT Slab Foundation Systems 1. PT slabs may be utilized for construction of typical one- and two- story residential structures onsite. The information and recommendations presented in this section are not meant to supercede design by a registered structural engineer or civil' engineer familiar with PT slab design or corrosion engineering consultant 2 From a soil expansion/shrinkage standpoint, a fairly common contributing factor to distress of structures using PT."slabs is' a significant fluctuation, in the moisture content of soils underlying the perimeter of the slab, compared to the center, causing a "dishing" or "arching" of the slabs To mitigate this possible phenomenon, a combination of soil presaturation (if necessary, or after the project has been dormant for a period of time) and construction of a perimeter "cut off' wall grade beam may be employed 3 For very low to low (E I 0 through 50) expansive soils, perimeter and mid span beams should be a minimum 12 inches deep below the lowest adjacent pad grade. The perimeter foundations may be integrated into the slab design or independent of the slab The perimeter beams should be a minimum of 12 inches in width " A vapor barrier should be utilized and be of' sufficient thickness to provide an' adequate separation of foundation from soils. (10 mil thick).' The vapor barrier should be adequately sealed to provide a continuous water-resistant barrier under Caiavera Hills ii, LLC ' • ' ' • ' , ' '. , W.O. 3459-B1-SC • Calavera Hills ii, Village W ' ' October 4; 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror ' ' ' ' ' • Page 9 GeoSoils, Inc. - - the entire slab. The vapor barrier should be sandwiched between two 2-inch thick layers of sand (SE?30) for a total of 4 inches of sand. 4 Isolated piers should be incorporated into the PT slab system 5; ., Specific soilpresaturation for. slabs is not required for very, low expansive soils; however, the moisture content of the subgrade soils should be at or above the soils' optimum moisture contentto a minimum depth of 12 to 18 inches, below grade, 'depending on the footing embedment. 6.' •" PT 'slabs should be designed using sound engineering practice and 'be in• accordance with the Post-Tension Institute (P11), local, and/or national code criteria and the. recommendations of a' structural or civil, engineer qualified in PT slab. . design. Alternatives to PTI methodology may be used if equivalent systems can be ; - ' proposed which accommodate the angular distortions', -expansion parameters and settlements noted for this projeót. If alternatives to PTI are suggested by' the designer or structural consultant, 'consideration should be 'given, for additional review by a qualified structural PT designer... Soil related parameters for PT slab . design, are presented on the following Perimeter Footing Embednent** . CATEGORY i (PT)* . CATEGORY, ii (PT) ' 12 inches ' ' 12 inches**. Allowable Bearing Value ' . ' 1,000 pSf*** ' . 1,000 psf*** Modules of subgrade reaction ' 100 psi/inch ' ' , .• 75 psi/inch Coefficient of Friction . . ' ' ' ' . 0.35 ' • .' 0.35' Passive Pressure ' ' . 225 pcf. . ' 225 pcf 'Soil Suction (Pt). " '' ' ' 3.6. :•' 3.6 Depth to Constant Soil Suction ' . 5'fe& ' .' 5 feet ' Thornthwaite Moisture ' ' . . ' -20.0 . ' ' ' -20.0 .' em Edge •. ' ' ,.' ,' . . 2.5 ' 2.7 em Center ' ' 5:0 . ' ' ' - ' 5.5 Yedge • ' ' . . ' ' ' ' 0.35. 0.5 Ym Center ' " . ' ' ' 1.1 . ' . ' 2.0 Minimum Slab Thickness - 5 inches ' . 5 'inches . Foundation design using the spanabiiity method may also be used for Category i conditions.- Lab data indicates E.I. .0-50 for this site. .. •. ' .' ' ' ' . ," Bearing for slab-on-grade only, bearing valUe for interior or perimeter beams should be in accordance with parameters provided for conventional continuous and isolated spread footings.: I 7 Provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction phase of development, a 'majority (>50 percent) of the anticipated foundation settlement is expected to occur during construction Maximum total settlement is not expected to exceed approximately 1½ inches and Caiavera Hills ii, LLC ' • - '. ' - . . ' , . •' W.O. 3459-B1 -SC Calavera Hills ii, Village W ' ' ' •- ' ' ' ' . . • October 4, 2004 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .w.ror. ' • ". .' ' . ' ' ' . ' • . •' ' . • Page 10, GeoSofls, Inc. should occur below the heaviest loaded columns. Differential settlement is not anticipated to exceed 3/4'of an inch between similar, elements, in a 40-foot span. Designers of PT slabs should review the parameters provided for PT slabs, and compare using a span distance of 5 feet, using a modules of subgrade reaction indicated in the previous table 8. In accordance with guidelines presented in the UBC, improvements and/or footings should maintain a horizontaldistance, X, between any adjacent descending slope . face and the bottom outer edge of the improvement and/or footing. The horizontal' distance, X, may be calculated by using X =' h/3. X should not be less than 7 feet,. nor, need not be greater than 40 feet. X may be maintained by deepening' the footings. Improvements constructed within a distance of h/3 from the top of slope may be subject to lateral distortion. ' . ' ' ' .• . FOundations for 'any adjacent structures, including' retaining walls, should be,': deepened (as necessary) to below a 1:1 projection upward and away from any . proposed lower foundation system. ,This recommendation may not be considered , - valid if the additional surchargç imparted by the upper foundation on the lower foundation has been incorporated into the design of the lower foundation.. AdditionaIetbacks, not dis'bussed or superceded herein, and presented in the. UBC are considered vaIid EXTERIOR FLATWORK ' ' Exterior driveways, walkways, sidewalks, or patios, using, concrete slab-on-grade construction, should be .designed. and constructed in. accordance ',with the. following.. criteria Driveway slabs should be a minimum 4 inches in thickness; all other exterior slabs' may be a nominal 4 inches in thickness; however, such nominal slabs will be at : increased risk for distress.' 'A thickened edge should be considered for. all flatwork adjacent to landscape area .2. •. Slab subgrade should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent'relative compaction and moisture conditioned to at, or above, the soils optimum moisture content 3.' The use of transverse and longitudinal control joints shoUld' be considered to hel control slab cracking due to concrete shrinkage-or expansion. Two of the-best ways to: control this movement are: 1) add a sufficient amount of properly placed' ' reinforcing steel, increasing tensile strength, of the slab such as 6x6, Wi .4xWi .4; and/or, 2) provide' an' adequate: amount of control and/or exansion joints to accommodate anticipated concrete shrinkage and expansion We would suggest 'Caiavera Hills II, LLC, ' . ' . . ' ' . . . ' w.o:3459-B-1-SC CalaveraHiiis' ii, Village W , ' ' ' ', . October 4, 2004 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .w.ror • . • ' ' . Page 11, GeoSoils, Inc. that the maximum control joint spacing be placed on 5-to 8-foot centers, or the smallest dimension of the slab, whichever is least. : No traffic should be allowed upon the newly poured concrete slabs until they have been properly cured to within 75 percent of design strength. 'Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times Adjacent landscaping should be graded to drain into the street/parking area, or other approved area; All surface water should be appropriately directed to areas designed for site drainage 6 Concrete compression strength should be a minimum of 2,500 psi CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALLS/WALLS General I Foundations may be designed using parameters provided in the Design section of Foundation Recommendations presented herein Wall sections should adhere to the County and/or City guidelines All wall designs should be reviewed by a qualified structural engineer for structural capacity, overturning, and seismic resistance stability per the UBC (ICBO, 1997) The design parameters provided assume that onsite or equivalent low expansive soils are used to backfill retaining walls If expansive soils are used to backfill the proposed walls within this wedge, increased active and at-rest earth pressures will need to be utilized for retaining wall design Heavy, compaction equipment should not be used above a 1 1 projection, up and away from the bottom of any wall The following recommendations are not meant to apply to specialty walls (cribwalls, loffel, earthstone, etc) Recommendations for specialty walls will be greater than those provided herein, and can be provided upon. request Some movement of the walls constructed should be anticipated as soil strength parameters are mobilized This movement could cause some cracking dependent upon the materials used to construct the wall. To reduce wall cracking due to settlement, walls should be internally grouted and reinforced with.. steel Restrained Walls Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and compacting backfill material, or that have re-entrant or male corners, should be designed for an at-rest equivalent fluid pressures of 60 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading For areas of male or re-entrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of the wall (2H) laterally from the corner. Building walls below grade should be Caiavera Hills ii, LLC . ... . W.O. 3459-B1,-SG Calavera Hills ii Village .W October 4, 2004 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .w.ror . .. . . . . Page 12 GeoSoils, Inc. .. water-proofed or damp-proofed, depending on the degree of moisture protection desired. Refer to the following section for. preliminary recommendations from surcharge loads. Cantilevered Walls These recommendations are for cantilevered retaining walls up to 15 feet high. 'Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflections. An empirical equivalent fluid pressure (EFP) approach may, be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit weights are provided for specific slope gradients of the.retained material.' These do 'not include other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, seismic events, or adverse geologic conditions. '.*SURFACESLOPEOF & 4EQUIVALENTLUID RETAINED MATERIAL ' WEIGHTP C F .'.., . ,HORlZONTALTOVERTICAL . 'g àlect'VeôWEänhI&SOily Level.' 35 2tol ' 45 The equivalent fluid density should be increased to 60 pcf for level backfill at the angle point of the wall (corner or male re-entrant) and extended a minimum lateral distance of 2H on either side of the corner. Traffic loads within a 1:1 projection up from-the wall heel, due to light trucks and cars, should be considered as a load of 100 psf per foot in the upper 5 feet of wall in uniform pressure. For preliminary design purposes, footing loads within a 1:1 backfill zone behind wall will be added to the walls as 1/3 of the bearing pressure for one footing width, along the wall alignment.' Sound Walls/Top-of-Slope Walls . Foundations for top of slope sound walls, using concrete block construction, may be constructed in accordance with conventional foundation recommendations presented in this report. Expansion/construction joints should not 'exceed 20 feet on center. Foundations should maintain a minimum lateral distance of 7 feet from the outside bottom edge of the wall footing to the face of any adjacent slope. . Wall Backfill and Drainage All retaining walls should be provided 'with an adequate gravel and pipe back drain and outlet system to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards presented herein. Retaining wall drainage and outlet systems should be reviewed by the project design civil, engineer, and incorporated into project plans. Pipe should consist of schedule 40 perforated PVC pipe.. Gravel, used'in the back. Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village W October 4, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror Page 13 GeoSoils, Inc. drain systems should be a minimum of 1 cubic foot per lineal foot of /8- to 1 1/2-inch clean: crushed rock encapsulated in filterfabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent) additional gravel may be warranted depending on wall height and the nature of the wall backcut Perforations in pipe should face down The surface of the backfill should be sealed by pavement, or the top 18 inches compacted to 90 percent relative compaction with native soil. Proper surface drainage should also be provided As an alternative to gravel back drains, panel drains (Miradrain 6000, Tensar, etc) may be used. Panel drains should be installed per manufacturers' guidelines. Regardless of the back drain used, walls should be water-proofed where they would impact living areas, or where staining would be objectionable. Wall Footing Transitions Site walls are anticipated to be supported on footings designed in accordance with the recommendations in this report Wall footings may transition from bedrock to fill.--,If this condition is present, the civil designer may specify either A minimum of a 2-foot overexcavation and recompaction of bedrock materials, as measured for a distance of 2H from the transition in the direction of the wall Overexcavations should be completed for a minimum lateral distance of 2 feet beyond the footing, measured perpendicular to the wall. Increase-of the amountof reinforcing steel and-wall detailing (i.e., expansion joints or crack control joints) such that a angular distortion of 1/360 for a distance of 2H on either side of the transition maybe accommodated. Expansion joints should be sealed with a flexible grout C) Embed the footings entirely into native formational material If transitions from cut to fill transect the wall footing alignment at an angle of less than 45 degrees (plan view), the designer should follow recommendation "a" (above,) and until such transition is between 45 and 90 degrees to the wall alignment PAVEMENTS Pavement design for streets has been performed, and is presented in GSI (2004b) Concrete driveway pavements outside the public right of way may be constructed per the exterior concrete slab recommendations presented in this report Caiavera Hills ii, LLC. • S • W.O. 3459B1SC Caiavera Hills il,. Village W S • October 4, 2004 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror S Page 14 S. • GeoSoils, Inc. DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Slope Deformation General Compacted fill slopes, designed using customary factors of safety for gross or surficial stability, and constructed in general accordance with the design specifications, should be expected to undergo some differential vertical heave, or settlement, in combination with differential lateral movement in the out-of-slope direction, after grading This- post-'construction movement occurs in two forms slope creep, and, lateral fill extension (LFE) Slope Creep Slope creep is caused by alternate wetting and drying of the fill soils which results in slow downslope movement This type of movement is expected to occur throughout the life of the slope, and is anticipated to potentially affect improvements or structures (i.e., separations and/or cracking), placed near the top-of-slope, generally within a horizontal distance of approximately 15 feet, measured from the outer, deepest (bottom outside) edge of the improvement, to the face of slope The actual width of the zone affected is generally dependant upon: 1) the height of the slope; 2)the amount of irrigation/rainfall-the slope receives, and, 3) the type of materials comprising the slope This movement generally results in rotation and differential settlement of improvements located within the creep zone Suitable mitigative measures to reduce the potential for distress due to lateral deformation typically include setback of improvements from the slope faces (per the 1997 UBC and/or California Building Code), positive structural separations (i.e., joints) between improvements, and, stiffening and deepening of foundations Per. Section 1806 5 3 of the UBC, a horizontal setback (measured from the slope face to the outside bottom edge of the building footing) of H/3 is provided for structures, where H is the height of the fill slope in feet and H/3 need not be greater than 40 feet Alternatively, in consideration of the discussion presented above, site conditions and Section 1806.5.6 of the UBC H/3 generally need not be greater than 20 feet for the Calavera Hills II development As an alternative to a deepened footing, where the adjacent slope is greater than 45 feet in height and the building/footing is within 20 feet from the slope face, a differential settlement of '/ inch (additional) may be applied to the design of that portion of.thè structure(s). Any settlement-sensitive improvements (i.e. walls, spas, flatwork, etc) should consider the above Calavera Hills ii, LLC •. • • • W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills ii, Village W • • • • • October 4, 2004 Fiie e \wp9\3400\3459L1 w ror Page 15 GeoSoils, Inc. Lateral Fill Extension (LFE) LFE occurs due to deep wetting from irrigation and rainfall on slopes comprised of expansive materials Based on the generally very low expansive character of onsite soils, the potential component of slope deformation due to LFE is considered minor, but may not be totally precluded. Although some movement should be expected, long-term movement from this source may be minimized, but not eliminated, by placing the fill throughout the slope region, wet of the fill's optimum moisture content. During grading of the site, GSI. observed fill, soil moisture contents during fill placement and compaction. Our observations indicate that the moisture content of the fill is generally above the soils optimum moisture content, in accordance with our recommendations Summary . . .. .. ... . It is generally not practical to attempt to-eliminate the effects of either slope creep or LFE Suitable mitigative measures to reduce the potential of lateral deformation typically include setback of improvements from the slope faces (per the 1997 UBC and/or California Building Code), positive structural separations (i.e., joints) between improvements, stiffening; and, deepening of foundations. All of these measures are recommended for design of structures and improvements and minimizing the placement of "dry" fills Slope Maintenance and Planting . . . . .. . . Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of all earth materials Slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage, away from slopes, should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes Over-watering should be avoided as it can adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions Graded slopes constructed utilizing onsite materials would be erosive..Eroded debris may be minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover soon after construction Compaction to the face of fill slopes would tend to minimize short-term erosion until vegetation is established Plants selected for landscaping should be light weight, deep rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate m Jute-type matting, or other fibrous covers, ay aid in. allowing the establishment of aspárse plant cover. Utilizing plants other than those, recommended above will increase the potential for perched water, staining, mold, etc to develop A rodent control program to prevent burrowing should be implemented Irrigation of natural (ungraded) slope areas is generally not recommended Over- steepening of slopes should be avoided during building construction activities and landscaping Caiavera Hills ii, LLC ' . ' . , . . . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC '. • Calavera'Hiils'ii, Village , ' • • • •' ... . October 4, 2004 . • . File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.w.ror . I • • • • • • Page 16 • • GeóSoils, Inc. Drainage Adequate lot surface drainage is a very 'important factor in reducing the likelihood of adverse performance of foundations, hardscape, and slopes Surface drainage should be sufficient to prevent ponding of water anywhere on a lot, and especially near structures and tops of slopes. Lot surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during fine grading, landscaping, and building construction. Therefore, care should be taken that future landscaping or construction activities do not create adverse drainage conditions Positive site drainagewithin lots and common areas should be provided and maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water., should be directed away from foundations and-not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground. In general, the area within 3 feet around 'a structure should slope away from the structure (GSl, 2003d). We recommend that unpaved lawn and landscape areas have a ,. minimum gradient of 1 percent sloping away from structures, and whenever possible, should be above adjacent paved areas. , Consideration should be giien to avoiding" "construction of planters adjacent to structures (buildings, pools, spas, etc.). Pad drainage' should be directed toward the street or other approved area(s). Although not a gebtechnical requirement, roof gutters, down spouts, or other appropriate means may be. ' utilized to control roof drainage. Down spouts, or drainage devices, should outlet a minimum of.3 feet from structures (GSI, 2003d), or into a subsurface drainage system.. Areas of seepage may develOp due to irrigation or heavy rainfall, and should be 'anticipated. Minimizing irrigation will lessen this potential.' If 'areas of seepage develop, recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon request , Erosion Control •' ' ' ' ' : Cut and fill' slopes will be subject to surficial erosion during and after grading. Onsite earth materials have a moderate to high erosion potential. Consideration should be given to providing hay bales and silt fences for the temporary control of surface water, from a geotechnical.viewpoint. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '• Landscape Maintenance Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided Over-watering the landscape areas will adversely affect proposed site improvements. We recommend that any open-bottom, raised box planters adjacent to proposed structures be restricted for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, clOsed-bottom type, planters could be utilized: An'outlet placed in the bottom of the planter could be installed'' to direct drainage, away from structures or any exterior concrete flatwork. If raised box' planters are constructed adjacent to structures, the sides and bottom of the planter should be provided with a moisture barrier to prevent penetration of irrigation water into the subgrade Provisions should be made to drain the excess irrigation water from the planters without saturating the,subgrade below or adjacent to the planters. - Giaded slope areas' • 'should be planted with drought resistant vegetation. Consideration should be-given to the Caiavera Hills ii, LLC • ' ' ' W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills Ii, Village W , • ' • ' ' October 4, 2004 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .w.ror • , • ' ' ' ' ". '- ' • , Page 17 • ' GeoSoits, Inc. type of vegetation chosen and their potential effect Upon surface improvements (i.e., some trees will have an effect on concrete flatwork with their extensive root systems). From a geotechnical standpoint, leaching is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If the surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding amendments, they should be recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction Subsurface and Surface Water. Subsurface and surface water are not anticipated to affect site development, provided the recommendations :contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction, and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions, along zones of contrasting permeabilities, may -not be prebluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and 'should be anticipated., Should '. perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the' observed .groundwater '• 'conditions. Groundwaterconditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, ' '1 or other factbrs. ' •' " '.' , ' ,0 , - ', ' ' " Tile Flooring Tile fl6oring can crack,' reflecting cracks in the concrete slab below the tile, although small ' cracks in a conventional slab may not be significant. The tile installer should consider . •. installation methods that reduce possible cracking of the tile 'such as•slipsheets; a vinyl crack isolation membrane,, or other approved method by 'the' Tile, Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute Site Improvements Recommendations for'exterior concrete flatwork construction are provided in Table 3 of ..this report. If in the futUre,' any additional improvements '(e.g., pools,. spas, etc.) are : planned for the site, recommendations concerning-the geological or geotOchnical aspects ' of design and construction of said improvements should be provided upon request. This : 'office should, be notified in advance of' any fill'placement, grading. of the site, or trench , báckfilling after rough grading' has been completed. This, includes any grading,, utility trench, and retaining wall backfills .Additiohal Grading ' . " ,' '., ' ' , '• , ,' , , This office shoUld be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading'of ' the site, or trench, backfilling after rough grading has been completed: This includes completion of grading in the street and parking areas and utility trench and retaining wall: backfills Caiavera Hiiis,il, LLC ' ' ' , ' ' ' W.O. 3459-B1-SC - ' - Calavera Hills Ii, Village W '. '• .' ' • October 4, 2004 File: e:\w OO p9\343459b1 .w.ror ,. ' , , ' , ' : ' ' -' ' ' Page 18 GeoSoils, Inc. T Footing Trench Excavation. . All footing excavations should be observed, by a representative of this firm subsequent to trenching and prior to concrete form and reinforcement placement. The purpose of the observations is to verify that the excavations are made into the recommended bearing ' material and to the minimum widths and depths recommended for construction. If loose or compressible materials are exposed within the footing excavation, a deeper footing Or removal and recompaction of the subgrade materials would be recommended atthät'time. Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations should be compacted to a minimunI relative compaction of 90 percent, if not removed 'from the site. •' , . ' . . . . , ' . Trenching ' . Considering the nature of the onsite soils, it should be anticipated that caving or sloughing , . ,could be a factor in subsurface excavations and trenching. Shoring or excavating the trench walls at the angle of repose (typically 25 to, 45 degrees) may be necessary and should be anticipated All excavations should be observed by one of our representatives and minimally conform to CAL-OSHA and local safety codes. ' , . .• . , : ' Utility Trenóh Backfill ' . . ' .' " . ' . ' .. " ' . • 1. All interiOr, utility trench backfill should be brought to at least 2 percent above.. optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a minimum relative ' compaction of.90 percent of the. laboratory standard. As an alternative for shàllbw. (1 2-inch to 18-inch) under-slab trenches, sand having a sand equivalent value of . ,' 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. Observation, probing and testing should be. provided to. verify.the desired results. 2 Exterior trenches adjacent to, and within areas extending below a 1:1-plane, projected from the outside, bottom edge of the footing, and all trenches beneath' hardscape features and in slopes, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the, aboratory standard*. - . Sand backfill, unless excavated from the trench, should not be used in these bacfill areas. Compaction testing and observations along with probing, should be accomplished to verify the desired results 3 All trench excavations should conform to CAL-OSHA and local safety codes 4 Utilities crossing grade beams, perimeter beams, or footings should either pass • . , below the footing or grade beam utilizing a hardened collar or foam spacer,'.'or pass . through'the'footing or grade beam in accordance with the recommendations of the structural engineer. Caiavera Hills Ii, LLC • : • • • • . •' . . w.a 3459-B1-SC • Calavera Hills II, village W. • •, . . . • . . . • October 4, 2004' File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .w.ror . • . '. . . . . • • • " • Page 19 . GàoSöils, Inc. •. . . ' • . • . SUM MARY-OF RECOMMENDATIONS' REGARDING 'GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING We recommend that observation and/or testing be performed by GSI at each of the following construction stages: 0 . During grading/recertification After excavation of building footings, retaining-wall footings, and freestanding walls; :— footings, prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Prior toT pouring any slabs or flatwork, after presoàking/presaturation of building pads and other flatwork subgrade, before the placement of concrete, reinfàrcing . steel, capillary break (i.e., sand, pea-gravel, etc.),, or vapor barriers. (i.e., visqueen, etc) During retaining wall subdrain installation, prior to backfill placement ' During placement of backfill for area.drain, interior plumbing, utility line trenches, and retaining wall backfill During slope construction/repair When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during any construction operations, subsequent to the issuance of this report. When any developer or homeowner improvements, such as flatwork, spas, poOls,. . walls, etc.,' are constructed. . .. '' .' . . . . • . . ....:. ' . . . ... . . . . .. •• A 'report of geotechnical observation and -testing should be provided at the ' conclusion of each of the, above stages, in order to provide concise and clear documentation of site work, and/or to comply with code requirements OTHER DESIGN' PROFESSIONALS/CONSULTANTS •' . • "•' The design civil engineer, structural engineer, PT designer, architect, landscape architect,,.-''" wall designer, etc..should reviewthe.recommendations prbvided herein, incorporate these: . • T recommendations into all their respective plans, and by explicit reference; make this report part of their project plans S •0S • , 0 • 0 • . ••'• .• Caiavera Hills ii, LLC • • 5 • • • • W.O. 39-B1-Sc calavera.Hiiis ii, Village W ' • .' S • • • ' • October 4, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1w.ror S • 0 ' 5 0 o • • S • • • Page 20 . '• 5 0 •. S GeoSoils, Inc. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS The geotechnical conditions discussed in this report, including, but not limited to, irrigation, landscaping, settlement, expansive soils, property maintenance, etc., and their ramifications regarding the long term performance of the project, should be provided to each homeowner and/or any homeowners association PLAN REVIEW Any additional project plans generated for this project should be reviewed by this office, prior to construction, so that construction is in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations of this report LIMITATIONS The materials encountered on the project site and utilized for our analysis are believed representative of the area, however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during mass grading Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors Inasmuch as our study is based upon our review and engineering analyses and laboratory data, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied Standards of practice are subject to change with time GSl assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others, or their inaction, or work performed when GSI is not requested to be onsite, to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly implemented Use of this report constitutes an agreement and consent by the user to all the limitations outlined above, notwithstanding any other agreements that may be, in place In addition, this report maybe subject to review by the controlling authorities Thus, this report brings to completion our scope of services for this project Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II Village W October 4 2004 File e \wp934OO\3459b1 w ror Page 21 GeoSolls, Inc. Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTh (It) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITYJ (pcI) I REL COMP TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 71 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 187.0 14.2 108.7 90.2 ND A 72 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 199.0 13.2 09.4 - 90.8 ND A 73 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 201.0 13.1 08.6 - 90.1 ND A 74 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 203.0 13.6 09.5 - 90.9 ND A 75 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 204.0 13.3 10.0 - 91.3 Sc A 76 12/2/02 Rear Lot 49 Village W 205.0 13.5 _109.5 .90.9 ND A. 77 12/2/02 Rear Lot 46 Village W 195.0 12.9 108.7 90.2 ND A 78* 12/2/02 Rear Lot 46 Village W 198.0 13.9 105.7 87.7 ND A 78A 12/2/02 Rear Lot 46 Village _198.0 14.2 109.4 90.8 ND A 79 _12/2/02 Rear Lot 47 Village W ._ 99.0 13.2 109.9 91.2 ND A 80 12/2/02 Rear Lot 46 Village W 201.0 13.6 110.1 91.4 . SC A 93 12/4/02 Horizon P112+00 Village W 139.0 13.8 109.5 90.9 ND. A 104 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 46 Village W 194.0 13.8 08.7 - 90.2 ND A 105 _12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 46 Village W 197.0 13.7 10.0 - 91.3 ND A 106 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 46 Village 199.0 14.5 09.7 - 91.0 ND A 107 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 46 Village 202.0 14.1 _111.5 92.5 ND A 108 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 47 Village W 201.0 13.6 09.4 - 90.8 . ND A _109 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 47 Village W 203.0 13.4 109.5 - 90.9 ND A 110 12/5/02 Canyon Area Lot 46-47 Village W 205.0 13.6 108.9 90.4 ND A 194 12/30/02 Slope Area Lot 47-48 Village W 205.0 14.6 109.4 90.8 ND A 195 12/30/02 Slope Area Lot 45 Village W 208.0 13.2 112.8 93.6 ND A 196 12/30/02 Slope Area-Lot 47 Village W .206.0. 13.9 111.5 92.5 ND A 197 12/30/02 . Lot 46 Village W 208.0 12.9 115.3 95.7 ND A 198 12/30/02 Lot 49 Village 208.0 1.2 - 118.9 93.0 ND B 199 12/30/02 Lot 47 Village 209.0 10.9 117.9 92.1 ND B 200 12/30/02 Lot 46 . Village W 210.0 0.8 - 117.1 - 91.5 ND B. 201* 12/30/02 Lot 48 Village W 211.0 11.4 11.1 - - 86.7 ND -B '201A 12/30/02 Lot 48 Village 211.0 _119. 16.2 - 90.8 ND B 202 12/30/02 Slope Area LOt 44 Village W 213.0 14.5 10.1 91.4 ND A 203 12/30/02 Lots 45-46 Village W 213.0 13.6- 111.1 92.2 SC . A 204 12/31/02 Lot 48 Village 212.0 12.2 _114.5 90.9. ND C 205 12/31/02 Lot 45 Village W 214.0 - 12.8 16.6 92.5 ND - C 206 12/31/02 . Lot 50 Village 216.0 - 14.6 109.8 91.1 ND A 207 12/31/02 Lot 47 . Village W 216.0 15.1 113.0 93.8 ND A 208 12/31/02 Lot 48. Village 218.0 13.2 110.1 91.4 ND A 209* 12/31/02 Lot 49 - Village 219.0' 12.5 102.3 84.9 ND . A 209A 12/31/02 Lot 49 Village W 219.0 13.1 108.7 90.2 - ND A 210 12/31/02 Lot 50 Village 220.0 13.3 110.3 91.5 SC A 359 1/21/03 Meadow Dr 30+50 Village W 210.0 10.6 119.5 91.2 ND G 360 1/21/03 Meadow Dr 31 +50 Village W 212.0 10.5 121.8 93.0 ND G 361 1/21/03 Meadow Dr 31 +00 VillageW 214.0 11.2 118.2 90.2 ND G 362 1/21/03 . Meadow Dr 31+50 Village W 216.0 10.8 119.1 90.9 ND G. 363 1/21/03 Meadow Dr 31+10 Village W 217.0 10.1 1 119.7 91.4 ND G Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village W October 2004 File: C:\exceMables\3400\3459b1,w.ror GeoSoils, Inc. Page 1 Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTh (It) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITYICOMP (pcI)XX I REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 364 1/21/03 Meadow Dr 31+80 Village W' 219.0 11.9 119.6 91.3 ND G 365 1/21/03 Horizon P1 30+40 Village W 218.0 9.9 118.8 90.7 ND G 366 1/21/03 Horizon P1 31+25 Village W 221.0 10.3 1182 90.2 ND G 436 2/5/03 Toe Slope Horizon P1 Village W 143.0 12.4 1132 90.2 SC 0 437 2/5/03 Toe Slope Horizon P112+00 Village W 146.0 11.9 115.2 91.8 ND 0 438 2/5/03 Toe Slope Horizon P112+00 Village W 144.0 11.2 113:7 90.6 ND 0 447 2/6/03 Toe Lot 117 Village W 144.0 14.6 108.7 90.2 SC A 448* 2/6/03 Hoa Lot 121 Village W 145.0 10.0 107.4 89.1 ND A 448A 2/6/03 Hoa Lot 121 Village W 145.0 13.2 110.0 91.3. ND A 449 2/6/03 Hoa Lot 121 Village W 144.0 13.9 110.9 92.0 ND A- 512 2/19/03 . Slope Area Hoa Lot 121 Village W 146.0 13.6 1.9 _1 92.9 SC 'A 513 2/19/03 Slope Area Hoa Lot 121 Village W 146.0 14.2 114.0 94.6 sc A 519 2/20/03 Basin Lot 12. Village W 149.0 14.1 110.1 91.4 ND .A. 520 2/20/03 , Basin Lot 121 Village W 150.0 13.7 '110.5 91.7 ND A 521 2/20/03 Slope Area Lot 117 Village W 146.0 10.9 _118.2 90.2 ND G 522 2/20/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W .152.0 11.4 121.4 92.7 ND ,G 523 2/20/03 Basin Lot 121 Village 153.0 11.9 '121.9 93.8 ND E 524 2/20/03 Slope Area Lot 117 Village W 151.0 .12.3 121.0 93.1 ND E- 525 2/20/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W 155.0 12.4 119.9 92.2 SC E 526 2/21/03 Horizon P111+80 Village W 152.0 14.9 111.7 92.7 ND A 527 2/21/03 Lot 15 Village W 156.0 13.7 ' 108.9 90:4 ND A 528 2121/03 - Lot 117 Village 155.0 11.2 120.4 91.9 ND G 529 2/21/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W 156.0 10.5 , 120.5 92.0 ND -G 531 2/21/03 Richfield Dr 11+50 Village .,W 158.0 12.9 120.0 92.3 ND 'E 533 2126/03 Basin Hoa Lot 121 Village W 164.0, 12.9 119.1 91.6 . ND E, 534 2/26/03 Lot 117 Village 160.0. 13.7 _117.3_ 90.2 ' ND .....L. 535 2/26/03 ,'Basin Lot 121 Village W 158.0. 12.0 115.6 90.3 ' ND B 536 2/26/03' Basin Lot 121 . Village W 159.0 11.6 115.8 91.9 ND C 537 2/27/03 Basin Hoa Lot 121 Village W 160.0 12.8 116.4 92:4 ND C 538 2/27/03 Basin Hoa Lot 121 Village W 166.0 13.2 113.8 90.3 ND ' 539. 2/27/03' Lot 15 ' ' Village W 165.0 12.4 114.5 90.9 - SC- C 540 2/27/03 Slope Area Horizon P112+00 Village W 163.0 -. 11.9 ' 115.7 91.8 ND C 541 2/27/03 Horizon P112+15 Village W 167.0. 12.0' 137 90.2 ND -C. 542 2/28/03 -- Lot 15 Village W 169.0 .- 11.8 113.9 90.4 ND ' C 543 '"2/28/03 -' Slope Area Lot 117 Village W 166.0 12.2 114.7 91.0 ND " C 544 2/28/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W 166.0 12.4' 1137 90.2 ' - ND C 545 2/28/03 Lot 15 Village W 172.0 13.2 114.5 90.9 ND 546 1 .2/28/03 , Basin Lot 121 Village W . 170.0 .1.1.8 115.4 91.6 .ND- C 547 2/28/03 Lot 15 Village W 174.0 11.7 15.8 91.9 SC C 548 3/3/03 Lot 117 Village W 170.0 12.2 114.4 90.8 ND C 549 3/3/03 - Horizon P111+00 Village 175.0 13.4 113.7 90.2 ND C 609. 3/4/03 610'1 3/4/03 Lot 117 Village W 175.0 . 12.1 120.0 91.6 ND G Lot 15 - Village 177.0 10.6 1191 90.9 ND G Calavera Hills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3459bl.w.ror - W.O. 3459-B1-SC GeoSolls, Inc. . ' ' October 2004' Page 2, '-A - Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTh (it) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITY1COMP (pci) I REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 611 3/4/03 Lot 117 Village 178.0 10.9 119.3 91.1 ND G 612 3/4/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W. 177.0 11.4 121.6 92.8 ND G 613 3/4/03 Basin Lot 14 Village 178.0 10.8 119.7 91.4 ND G 617, 3/5/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W 163.0 13.0 114.3 90.7 ND C 619 3/6/03 Basin Lot 121 Village W 172.0 12.4' 114.8 91.1 ND. C 620 3/6/03 Basin Lot 121 . Village W 169.0 10.9 114.5 90.9 ND C 621 1 3/6/03 Lot 15 Village W. 179.0 11.2 '1 5.7 91.8 ND C 625 3/7/03 Basin Lot 121 . Village W 174.0 10.7 114.5 91.2 ND \D 626 3/7/03 Basin Lot 121 VillageW 161.0 11.2 '113.6 .90.5 ND D 627* 3/7/03 Horizon P111+50 Village W 181.0 - 8.8 108.8 86.7 ND D 627A 3/7/03 Horizon P111+50 Village W 181.0 . 10.5 113.8 90.7 ND 0 628., 3/7/03 Horizon P1 10+60 Village W 180.0 11.1 _116.1. 92.5 SC D 765 3/22/03 Rear Lots 49 & 50 Village W 205.0 16.2 111.7 92.7 ND A 766 3/22/03 Rear Lot 50 Village W 208.0 . 14.1 _112.7 93.5 NO A 838 4/8/03 . Lot 17' Village E-1 I 368.0 10.8 121.4 92.7 ND H 913 4/23/03 Rear Lots 16 & 117 Village W I 148.0, 15.2 08.9 - 90.4 ND A 914 4/23/03 Rear Lot 18 Village W 155.0 . 14.1 09.4 - 90.8 ND A 915 4/23/03 Rear Lots 16 & 117 Village W 152.0 14.3 10.3 - 91.5 ND A 916 4/23/03 Rear Lot 20 Village .W 164.0 11.4 119.6 91.3 ND .G 917 4/23/03 Rear Lot 17 .. Village W 159.0 10.8 21.4 . - 92.7 ND G 918 4/23/03 Rear, Lots 16 & 117 . Village W 163.0' 10.6 18.0 - 90.1 ND .G 919 4/23/03 Rear Lot 17 ' Village W 165.0 11.0 119.3 91.1 ND, 920. 4/23/03 Rear Lot. 19 Village W 169.0 . 10.0 . 22.7 93.7 ND. G. 921 4/23/03 . . Rear Lot 23 Village W 154.0 14.9 09.3 - 90.7 ND A: '925 4/24/03 Rear Lot 23 Village 160.0 10.9 . 18.9 .90.8 ND 926 4/24/03 Rear Lot 20 Village W 170.0 11.8 22.7 - 93.7 ND G 927 4/24/03 - Rear Lot 16. ' Village W 170.0 12.6 20.8. - 92.2. ND G 928 4/24/03 Rear Lot 22 Village W 166.0 12.9 ' 20.4 - 91.9 ND 929 4/24/03 Rear Lot 19 Village W 73.0 - 11.0 121.8 93.0 ND 930 4/24/03 Rear Lot 17 Village W 75.0 - 14.7 11.8 92.8 ND 'A 931 4/24/03 Rear Lot 21 Village W 177.0', 15.2, 09.8 - 91.1 ND ' A 932 4/24/03 'Rear Lot 24 Village W 69.0 - 11.5 . 18.6 - 90.5 ND, G 938 4/25/03 Rear Lot 16 Village W 77.0 . 12.2 117.3 90.2 ND E 939 4/25/03 Rear Lot 19 Village W 80.0. - . 11.9 118.4 91.1 ND ' E 940 4/25/03 'Rear ..0t 23 Village W 74.0' 12.7 121.7 93.6 ND E' 941 4/25/03 Rear Lot 20 . Village W 85.0 - 11.3 _1200 92.3 ND E 9421 4/25/0? Rear. Lots 22 & 23 Village W 82.0 - 10.9 . .1184 91.1 . ND E 949 4/28/03 Rear Lot 24 Village -W 77.0 - 14.8 112.7 93.5 ND A 950 4/28/03 ' Rear Lot 19 Village W 187.0. 13.2 110.4 91.6 ND A. 951. 4/28/03 Rear Lot 23 Village W .89.0 11.1. 123.4 94.2 ND 952"4/28/03' Rear Lot 18 Village W 183.0 , 10.6 121.8 .93.0 .' ND G 953 4/28/03 954%1 4/28/03 Rear Lot 22 Village W 195.0 10.1 ' 119.9 91.5 ND G Rear Lots 20 & 21 Village W 190.0 10.9 119.5 91.2 ND' G Calavera Hills II, LLC Ca!avera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceRtables\3406\3459bl.w.ror GéoSoils, Inc. W.O. 3459-B1-SC October 2004 Page Table 1 1 FIELD DENSITYTEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITY1COMP (pcf) REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 1671 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Rec Lot Village W 145.0 11.3 115.6 90.3 ND B 1672 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Rec Lot Village 162.0 ' 10.5 116.4 90.9 ND B 1673 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Rec Lot Village W 150.0 13.6 11.7 - 92.7 ND A 1674 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Rec Lot Village W 172.0 10.9 17.1 - 91.5 ND B 1683 9/25/03 Basin 11+50 Village W' 73.0 - 10.2 118.7 90.6 ND G 1684 9/25/03 Basin 12+00, Village W 79.0 - 10.1 18.2 - 90.2 ND 1685 9/25/03 Rear Lot 16 Village W 50.0 - 11.1 - 117.5 91.8 ND .B 1686 9/25/03 Rear Lot 17 . Village W 60.0 - . '10.6 117.4 91.7 ND B 687 • 9/25/03 RearLot18 ._Rear Lots 19& 20'. Village W 173.0 9.9 115.5 90.2 ND B 688 9/25/03 Village W 62.0 - 10.2 116.6 91.1 ND B 689 9/25/03 Rear Lot 21 . Village W 175.0 10.1 _120.1. 91.7' ND _ 1697 9/26/03 RearLot 22 Village 280.0 .10.2 116.0 90.6 ND B 698 9/26/03 Rear _Lots 22& 23 Village W__260.0 0.9 - 117.6. 91.9 ND._. B 699 • 9/26/03 Rear Lot 24 Village W _285.0 11.2 117.0 91.4 ND B 1700 9/26/03 RearLot 25' Village _290.0 10.4 117.4 91.7' ND B 1825 10/29/03 Horizon P113+50 Village W _172.0 9.2 '' 125.3 93.5 ND J 1826 10/29/03 Horizon P115+00 Village _175.0 ' 8.7 128.9 96.2 ND J- 1827 10/29/03 Horizon P116+50' Village W _183.0 8.8 ' ._10.3 . 127.4 95.1 ND J 1828 10/29/03 Horizon P112+75 Village W _175.0 126.2 . '94.2 ND -J 1829 10/29/03 West Horizon P114+50 Village 178.0 9.1 126.5 94.4 ND J 1830 10/29/03 East Horizon P116+25 Village W 184.0' 9.0 128.6 96.0 ._ND. 1831 1 10/29/03 East Horizon P1.13+00 Village 1177.0 8.5 ' 122.3 91.3 ND' J 1832 10/29/03 West Horizon P115+50 Village W 179.0 8.2' _128.4 95.8 ND 1833 10/29/03 East Horizon P114+80' Village W 182.0 '9.9 124.2 92.7 ND 'J '1834 10/29/03 East Horizon P116+50 _. Village 189.0 10.4 125.0 . 93.3 ND J 1835 10/29/03 East Horizon P115+30 Village W 189.0 8.7 129.4 96.6 ND ' 1836 10/29/03 East Horizon P113+70 ' Village W 179.0 8.3 128.5 95.9 ND. 'J 1837 10/30/03 Lot 19 Village 190.0 9.1 123.1 . 91.9 ND J' 1838 10/30/03 .Lot 18 Village W 185.0 8.2 ._8.8 126.4 ._94.3 ND J 1839 10/30/03 Lot 17 .- Lots 16&117 . Village W 181.0 123.5 92.2 ._ND :J 1840 10/30/03 Village W 180.0 9.6 127.8 95.4 ND ."J 1841 10/30/03 Lot117 Village W 181.0 9.9 126.9. 94.7 ,ND J 1842 10/30/03 Lots16 &1.17 Village 181.0 8.4 125.8 93;9 ND- J 1857 _11/6/03 Lot 24 Village 201.0 9.8 126.2 94.2 ND_' 1858 11/6/03 Lot 25 Village W, 202.0 '9.3 ' 122.7 91.6 ND J 1859 11/6/03 Lots 23&24 Village 202.0 8.6 122.9 . 91.7 ND J 1860 11/6/03 Lots 24& 25 Village W 204.0 '9.7 125.7 93.8 . ND J 1861 11/6/03 Lot 19 'Village W 191.0 10.2 127.6 95.2 ND .J 1862 11/6/03 Lot 20 _. Village 195.0 ' 9.1 123.0. 91.8 ND J 1863 11/6/03 Lot 22 Lot 117 '. Village 201.0 8.0. 123.3 92.0 ND 'J 1864 11/6/03 Village 198.0 8:5 123.4 92.1 'ND J 1871 1 11/7/03 Horizon P112+50 - Village 178.0 9.9 .126.5 94.4 ND J 1872 11/7/03 Horizon P114+20 VillageW 181.0 8.9 124.9 93.2 ND J. I Calavera kills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceMables\3400\3459b1 .w.ror GeoSoils, Inc. r W.O. 3459-B1-SC.': October 2004 Page 4 ) I. TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY I DENSITYICOMP (pcf) REL (%) TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 1873 11/7/03 Horizon P116+00 Village 185.0 9.0 124.6 93.0 ND J. 1874 11/10/03 Lot 13 Village 181.0 8.9 121.8 90.9 ND J 1875 11/10/03 . Lot 11 Village 184.0 8.2 125.4 .93.6 ND J 1876 11/10/03 Lot 15 Village 179.0 9.6 . 124.9 93.2 ND J 1877 11/10/03 Lot 12 : Village W 83.0 9.9 26.6 - 94.5 ND J 1878 11/10/03 Lot 14 Village 81.0 - 8.4 25.4 - 93.6 ND 1879 1 11/10/03 Lot 10 . Village W 188.0 10.2 21.3 - 90.5 ND. 1880 11/10/03 Lot . Village 190.0 10.7, 22.1 - 91.1 ND J 1881 11/10/03 Lots 8 & 9 . Village W . 201.0 9.6 _126.9 94.7 ND J 1882* 11/10/03 Lot . Village 195.0.. 8.2 - 13.0 .84.3 ND 1882A 11/10/03 Lot Village 195.0 9.2 121.8 90.9 ND J' 1883 11/10/03 Lots 8 & 9 . Village W 204.0 8.9 122.1 91.1 - ND -J 1884 11/10/03 .Lot Village W .' 199.0 9.0 _. 122.3 91.3 ND J' 1885 11/10/03 . -.Lot VillageW. '208.0 9.2 125.7. 93.8 ND J 1896. 11/21/03 .. Lot 106 Village W 261.0 9.3 123.4 92.1 ND J 1897 11/21/03 Lot 104 Village 256.0 9.9 123.0 91.8 ND J 1898 1.1/21/03 ' Lot 103 Village 254.0 9.6 124.2 92.7 ND 'J 99 11/21/03 ....t100 Village W 246.0 .8.2 111.9 83.5 ND J 1899A 11/21/03 Lot 100 VillageW 246.0 8.9 121.5 90.7 ND J 1900 11/21/03 Lot105 Village W 260.0 9.7 122.1 91.1 ND J 1901 11/21/03 Lot 102 Village W 253.0 9.0 123.3 92.0 ND 'J 1902 11/21/03 Lot 100 Village :248.0 8.4 122.7 91.6 ND J 1995 12/24/03 Lot 23 Village W FG 8.0 125.7 93.8 ND J 1996 12/24/03 Lot 22 Village W, FG 8.2 128.9. 96.2 ND J 1997 12/24/03 Lot 21 _. Village W FG 8.7 . 129.4 96.6 ND J '.1998 12/24/03 Lot 20 Village W FG 8.6 . 127.4 95.1 ND J 1999 12/24/03 Lot 19 Village W FG 8.4 124.9 93.2 ND J 2000 12/24/03 Lot 18 Village W FG 8.3 121.5 90.7 ND J 2001 12/24/03. Lot 17 Village W FG 8.9 .126.6 94.5 ND J 2002 12/24/03 . Lot 16 Village W FG 9.2 123.4 92.1 ND J 2003 12/24/03 Rec Lot 117 _' Village W FG . .8.1 124.6 93.0 ND J 2004 12/26/03 East Roadstone P11 1 +50 Village W 256.0 8.8 121.5 90.7 ND J 2005 12/26/03 East RoadstoneP113+10 Village W 252.0 9.7 124.9 93.2 ND J 2006 12/26/03 East RoadstoneP114+60 Village W, 242.0 .9.6 124.6 93.0 ND 2007 2/26/03 East RoadstonePl16+50 Village 222.0 8.3 128.1 95.6 .ND J' 2008 2/26/03 East.RoadstoneP112+00 Village W 260.0 .7.9 _126.1 94.1 ND J 2009 2/26/03 East RoadstoneP115+50 .Village W 243.0 8.9 _124.4 .92.8 ND J 2010 12/26/03 West RoadstoneP112+00 VillageW '257.0 9.9 .122.6. 91.5 ND J 2011 2/26/03 West RoadstoneP114+00 Village W 248.0 10.4 123.0 91.8 ND , J 2012 12/26/03 West RoadstoneP116+40 Village W 2320 10.0 130.4 97.3. ND J 2013 12/26/03 West RoadstonePl13+00 Village W, '.256.0 .9.1 124.6 93.0 1 'ND J 20141 12/26/031 West Roadstone P117+00 Village W 228.0 8.7 125.3 93.5 1 ''ND J 2015 12/29/031 SlopeRearLots 71&72. Village W 237.0 . 8.8. 122.1 91.1 1 ND J Tablel 1' FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS " alaverã Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC - Calâvera Hills II, Village October 2004 File: C:\exceMabfes\3400\3459b1 .w.ror GeoSoils, Inc. Pages. Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION %OR VILLAGE ELEV DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY I DENSITY1COMP (pct) REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 2016* 12129/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village W 240.0 9.7 17.9 _1 88.0 ND J 2016A 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village W 240.0 9.4 121.8 90.9 ND J 2017 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 71 Village W 241.0 9.2 124.9 93.2 ND J 2018 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lots 68 & 69 Village W 244.0 9.6 122.6 91.5 ND J 2019 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village W 246.0 8.8 120.7 90.1 ND 'J. 2020 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 67 Village W 260.0 8.2 122.9 91.7 ND: J 2021 12/30/03 Lot 108 Village W 266.0 9.5 124.0 92.5 .ND J 2022 12/30/03 Lot 107 Village W 264.0 9.9 124.5 92.9 ND . J. 2023 12130/03 Lot 103 Village W 255.0 8.3 125.6 93.7 ND J. 2024 12/30/03 Lot 102 Village W 250.0 9.6 129.7 96.8. . ND J 2025 12/30/03 Lot 104 Village W 258.0 10.5 126.1. 94.1 ND 5J. 2026 12/30/03 Lot 108 Village W 268.0 11.2 123.5 92.2 ND J 2027 12/30/03 Lot 106 Village W 263.0 10.9 121.7 90:8 ND J 2028 12/30/03 Lot 102 Village W 253.0 11.5 122.6 91.5 ND - J 2054 1/5/04 East Moon Field Dr 17+80 Village W 212.0 8.4 121.8 90.9. ND J 2055 1/5/04 East Moon Field Dr 18+60 Village W 202.0 9.9 122.2 91.2 ND J 2056 1/5/04 East Moon Field Dr 19+50 Village W 196.0 10.6 131.9 98.4 ND J 2057 1/5/04 West Moon Field Dr 18+50 Village W 206.0 9.1 124.1 926 ND J 2058 1/5/04 West Moon. Field Dr 19+90 Village W 194.0 8.8 122.6 91.5 .ND ;J 2059 1/5/04 West Moon Field Dr 17+50 Village W 218.0 8.4. 121.0 90.3 ND J 2060 1/5/04 West Moon Field Dr 19+00 Village W 205.0 8.1 122.1 91.1 ND J 2061 1 1/5/04 Lot 4 Village W 227.0 8.9 124.2 92.7 ND J 2062 1/5/04 Lot . Village -W, 221.0 8.3 . 129.2 . 96.4 ND J 2072 1/7/04 Lot Village . 213.0 9.1 124.1 91.3 ND N 2073 1/7/04 Lot Village 240.0 8.4 125.4 92.2 ND N 2074 1/7/04 Lot VillageW .234.0 8.7 128.3 .94.3 ND N 2089 1/9/04- Lot 110 . Village W. 267.0 .8.7 130:2 97.2 : ND J 2090 1/9/04 . Lot 112 Village 261.0 9.3 :127.3. 95.0 ND .2091 1/9/04 Lot 114 Village 252.0 . 9.9. 123.3 92.0 ND 'J 2092 1/9/04 . Lot 110 Village W 269.0 9.5 . 124.1 92.6 ND J 2093* 1/9/04 Lot 111 Village 265.0 . .8.2 116.0 86.6 ND J 2093A 1/9/04 Lot 111 Village W 265.0 87 122.1 91.1 ND J 2094 1/9/04 Lot 112 . Village 262.0 8.6 122.5 91.4 ND J 2095 1/9/04 ....ot 113 Village 258.0 P9.6 130.4 97.3 ND 2096,. 1/9/04 Lot 114 Village W 253.0 9.7 126.6 94.5 ND J 2097 1/9/04 . . Lot 109 Village W 275.0 9.1 121.7 90.8 ND. 2113 1/14/04 Lot 97 - Village 226.0 . 8.6 128.1 94.2 'ND N- 2114 1/14/04 . Lot 98 Village 234.0 9.91 1266 93.1 ND 2115 1/14/04 . Lot 99.. . Village 241.0 10.2 127.3 93.6 ND N 2116 1/14/04 . Rec Lot 115 Village 265.0 9.1 1.25.1 92.0 ND N 2117 1/14/04 Lot 115. Village 263.0 9.0 125.3 92.1 ND N 2118 1/14/04 , Lot 115 .. Village 265.0 9.8 124.8 91.8 ND N 2119 1/14/04 Lot 100 . Village FG 8.8 128.7 94.6 ND N Calavera Hills II, LLC 1 ' Calavera Hills II, Village W H File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3459b1w.ror GeoSoils, W.O. 3459-B1-SC October 2004 Page6 Table 1, . FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS •. TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION xx VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH MOISTURE CONTENT DRY I DENSITYjCOMP REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 2120 1/14/04 Lot 101 Village FG 8.6 128.0 94.1 ND N 2121 1 1/14/04 Lot 102 Village FG 8.2 127.6 93.8 ND N 2122 1/14/04 Lot 103 Village W FG 8.1 129.5 95.2 ND N 2123 1/14/04 Lot 104 Village W FG 8.0 128.8 94.7 ND N 2124 1/14/04 - Lot 105 Village W FG '8.5 126.9 93.3 ND N 2125 1/14/04 Lot 106 Village FG 8.2 127.6 93.8 ND N 2126 1/14/04 Lot 107 Village W FG 8.7 127.8 94.0. ND N 2127 1/15/04 Lot 95 Village W 212.0 8.8 125.1 92.0 ND N 2128 1/15/04 Lot 96 '. Village 220.0 8.9 124.3 '91.4 ND N 2129 1/15/04 Lot 99 Village 242.0 10.1 127.3 93.6' ND 'N 2130 1/15/04 ' Lot 98 . Village 235.0 . 8.6 126.2 92.8' ND 'N' 2131 1/15/04 ' Lot 96 Village W 221.0 9.2 _129.3 95.1 1 ND N 2132 1/15/04 ..,0t95 , Village 213.0 9.1 126.5 93.0 1 ND N 2133 1/15/04 Lot 6 Village W 215.0 9.8 125.4 92.2 ND 2134 1/15/04 Lot 1 . Village W 244.0 8.7 126.3 92.9 ND N 2135 1/15/04' , _Lot 2 Village 241.0 8.2 128.8 94.7 ND , N 2136 1/15/04 Lot Village .229.0 9.0 ' 128.0 94.1 ND N 2146 1/22/04 ' Lot 66 Village 269.0 8.9 128.0 94.1 ND N 2147 1/22/04 ' Lot 68 Village W ,259.0 9.4 126.9 932 ND N 2148 ' 1/22104 ....0t70 ' Village 251.0 "9.1 =131.2 96.5 ND N 2149 1/22/04 Lot 67' _. 'Village W 264.0 9.6 128.8 94.7 ND N 2150 1/22/04 Lot 69 _' Village W 254.0 8.4 131.4 96.6 ND N 2151 1/22/04 ,Lot 71 Village W' 246.0 8.9 132.6' 97.5 ND 'N' 2152 1/22/04 Lot 65 ' Village 274.0 9.6 _128.1 94.2 ND N 2153 1/22/04 ' Lot64 ___' Village W 272.0. 9.2 125.0 91.9' ND 'N .2154 1/22/04 , Lot 63 ' Village W 270.0' 8.4 . 127.6' 93.8 ND m.N 2155 1/22/04 ..Lot 64 Village W 274.0 8.3 130.4 95.9' ND N 2156 1/22/04 Lot 63 Village W 273.0 9.0 128.1 94.2 .ND ' 'N 2157 1/22/04 Lot 15 _. Village FG 8.0 131.8 96.9 ND N 2158 1/22/04' Lot 14 Village FG ,8.2 133.6 98.2 ND 2159 1/22/04 Lot13 Village FG, 7.6 130.7 '96.1 ND N 2160 1/22/04 Lot 12 . . Village FG 7.9 . 131.0 96.3 ND' N 2177 1/23/04 Lot 11 , ' Village .FG 8.2 128.9, 94.8 ND ,N.: 2178 "1/23/04 " Lot 10 Village W, FG 8.9 125.4 92.2 ND N 2179 1/23/04 Lot , • Village FG 8.9 131.2 96.5 ND N 2180 1/23/04 Lot Village FG 9.6. ' 124.3 91.4 , ND N 2181 1/23/04 Lot 7 Village W FG .9.7 124.4 91.5 ND N 2182 1/23/04 'Lot 6 Village FG , . 8.2 126.8 '93.2 'ND N 2183 1/23/04 ' Lot . Village W' 'FG 8.9 128.4 94,4. ND" N 2184 1/23/04 ' , Lot Village FG ' 9.4 124.2 91.3 ND N 2185 1/23/04 Lot 3 ' Village W FG 9.5 130.6 96,0'' 'ND ' 2186 1/23/04 Lot Village FG 8.2 , 129.5 95.2 ND N 2187 1/23/04 Lot 1 Village W FG 8.4 128.5 94.5 ND Calavera Hills H, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3459b1.w.ror .' . W.O. 3459-B1-SC October 2004 Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY I DENSITY1 (pci) REL COMP TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 2188 1/23/04 . Lot 108 Village W FG 8.9 130.8 96.2 ND N 2189 1/30/04 Lot 25 Village 205.0 8.2 121.8 90.9 ND J 2190 1/30/04 Lot 27 - Village 208.0 7.7 125.8 92.5 ND N 2191 1/30/04 Lot 30 Village 218.0 8.9 .134.2 98.7 ND N 2192 1/30/04 Lot 29 . Village 215.0 9.6 128.7 94.6 ND N 2193 1/30/04 . Lot 31 VillageW 218.0 9.3 129.5 95.2 ND N 2194 1/30/04 .. 1. Lot 30. Village 219.0 9.0 126.2 92.8 1 ND 'N 2195 1/30/04 Lot 28 Village W 211.0 8.8 127.2 93.5 ND N 2196 1/30/04 Lot 26 Village 205.0 8.2 123.6 90.9 ND N 2197 1/30/04 Lot 87 Village .218.0 9.5 122.9 90.4 SND N 2198 1/30/04 Lot 89 Village 217.0 8.0 125.4 92.2 ND N 2199 1/30/04 Lot 91 Village 210.0 .8.4 128.5 94.5 IND N 2200 1/30/04 . Lot 93 Village W 205.0 . . 7.9 128.2 94.3 ND N 2201. 1/30/04. Rec Lot 116 . .Village .203.0 .8.2 131.5 96.7 . ND 'N 2202 1/30/04 Lot 92 . Village 207.0 '8.8 . 131.4 96.6 ND .N 2203 1/30/04. Lot 90 Village 214.0 8.3 126.5 93.0 .ND .N 2204 1/30/04 . Lot 88 Village 219.0 8.0 129.1 94.9 ND 'N 2214 2/3/04 Lot 95 Village W FG .8.2 125.2 92.1 ND N 2215 2/3/04 Lot 96. '' Village . FG .8.4 _127.1 93.5 ND N 2216 2/3/04 Lot 97 . . Village FG 8.8 . 126.9 93.3 . ND N 2217 2/3/04 . . Lot 98 Village W. FG . 9.2 130.0 95.6 ND N 2218 2/3/04 . Lot 99 Village W FG 18.0 131.8 96.9 ND N 2219 2/3/04 Lot 109 Village FG .. 8.9 130.6 .96.0 ND N 2220 2/3/04 .. Lot. 110 Village FG .8.3 129.9 95.5 . ND N 2221 2/3/04. Lot 111 Village W FG 8.6 129.1 94.9 ND 2222 ,2/3/04 Lot 112 Village W FG 8.7. 131.4 96.6 ND N 2223 2/3/04 .: Lot 113 . Village W FG 8.2 126.9 933 ND N 2224 2/3/04 .' . Lot 114 Village W. ' FG 8.4 . 127.8 94.0 ND N 2225 2/3/04 Rec Lot 115 Village FG . 8.3 133.6 98.2 ND 'N 2226 2/3/04 Lot 64 Village FG . 8.0 128.9 94.8 . ND N 2227 2/3/04 Lot 65 . Village W : FG . 7.9 _121 94.9 ND N. 2234 2/6/04 Richfield Dr 18+50 . Village 195 11.4 117.2 91.6 'ND B 2235 2/6/04 Richfield Dr 20+50 . Village W, .. 198 -10.2 117.4 91.7 . ND "B' 2236 2/6/04. Richfield Dr 23+00 Village 202 . 10.1 . 183 - 92.4 ND B 2237 2/9/04 . Richfield Dr 19+60 Village W .200.0 11.0 19.6 - 93.4 ND. 'B 2238 2/9/04 Richfield Dr 22+00 Village W 209.0 10.6 :123.1 96.2 'ND .B 2239 2/9/04 Richfield Dr 23+60 , VillageW 209.0 11.3 122.5 93.5 ND .. '(3 2240 2/9/04 Richfield Dr 19+00 Village 204.0 . 11.2 . 120.5 92.0 ND . (3 2241 2/9/04 Richfield Dr 21 +40 Village 212.0 10.1 120.1- 93.8 ND B 2242 2/9/04 Richfield Dr 23+20 i Village W 213.0 .10.4 117.1 91.5 . ND B 2243 2/10/04 Front Lot 25 . Village W .200.0 . 8.4 127.4 . 93.6 . ND N 2244 2/10/04 . Front Lot 29 . Village W 211.0 8.2 124.4 91.5 -ND N 22,45 . 2/10/04 Front Lot 32 Village W 217.0 . . 9.6 128.9 94.8 ND N , Calavera Hills II, LLC - Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3459bl.w.ror W.O. 3459-B1-SC'. October 2004 Page Table FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY I DENSITV1COMP (pct) REL TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 2246 2/10/04 Front Lot 35 . Village W 217.0 8.3 123.6 90.9 ND N 2247 2/12/04 Lot 56 Village W 246.0 8.8 126.3 92.9 ND N 2248 2/12/04 . Lot 57 Village W 250.0 92 131.0 96.3 ND N 2249 2/12/04 Lot 55 Village W 242.0 9.1 122.9 90.4 ND N 2250 2/12/04 . Lot 59 Village W 258.0 7.9 126.9 93.3 ND N 2251 2/12/04 . Lot 61 Village W 268.0 8.2 124.4 91.5 ND N. 2252 2/12/04 .' Lot 60 Village W 264.0 . 8.1 124.7 91.7 ND N 2253 . 2/12/04 _0t58 Village 257.0 . 8.8 127.6 93.8 ND N 2254 2/12/04 Lot 62 Village W 271.0 9.1. 125.4 92.2 ND N 2255 2/17/04 Lot 86 . Village W 221.0 8.6 126.2 92.8 . ND N 2256 2/17/04 Lot 84 Village W 224.0 8.6 126.2 92.8 ND N 2257 2/17/04 Lot 34 Village W. 221.0 9:2 123.9 91.1 'ND N 2258 Wi 7/04 Lot 33 Village W 221.0 8.4. 124.2 91.3 ND N 2259 2/17/04 Lot 85 . Village 223.0 8.0 128.7 94.6 ND N 2260 2/17/04 Lot 35 . Village 223.0 8.2 128.1 94.2 ND. N 2261 2/19/04 Lot 24 ... Village FG 7.9 123.0: 91.9 ND J. .2262 2/19/04 Lot 25 Village FG .9.4 128.9 96.2 ND J 2263 2/19/04 Lot 26 Village W FG 9.2 129.4 96.6 ND J 2264 2/19/04 Lot 27 . Village W FG 9.9 127.4 95.1 ND J 2265 2/19/04 Lot 28 Village W FG 10.0 126.5 94.4. ND ..J 2266 2/19/04 Lot 29 Village W FG 9.6 125.8 93.9' ND 2267 2/20/04 Lot 30 Village W FG .•8.8' 126.3 92.9 ND N 2268 2/20/04 Lot 31 Village W FG 9.4 128.4 94:4 ND N 2269 2/20/04 . Lot 32 Village W FG 9.0 129.2 95.0. ND N 2270 2/20/04 ....ót 33 VillageW FG .8.6 131.4 96.6 ND ..N 2271 2/20/04 Lot 34 Village W . FG . 8.2 123.8 91.0 ND N 2272 2/20/04 Lot 35 __' Village W FG 8.5 125.0 91.9 ND N 2273 2/20/04 MeadowDrNorth 37+80 Village W 266.0 .8.2 122.7 90.2 ND N 2274 2/20/04 MeadowDrNorth 36+40 Village W 256.0 7.9 123.5 90.8 ND .;N. 2275 2/20/04 MeadowDrNorth 37+00 Village W 266.0 .7.7 123.2 90.6 ND N. 2276. 2/20/04 MeadowDr. North 35+50 Village W 254.0 S.C . 123.9 91.1 .ND N 2277 2/23/04 Meadow Dr South 36+50 Village W 263.0 ,10.2 127.6 93.8 ND. N 2278 2/23/04 MeadowDrSouth 35+50 Village W 253.0 . 11.4 , 125.4. 92.2 ND . N 2279 2/23/04 . MeadowDrSouth 36+00 Village W 258.0 10.0 1312 96.5 ND N 2280 2/23/04 Meadow DrSouth 35+00 Village W 249.0 :9.8 _' _127.8 94.0 ND N 2281 2/24/04 .. Lot63 Village W 273.0 ._8.2 124.9: 93.2 ND . 2282 2/24/04 ' Lot62 Village W 271.5 7.9 29.1 - 94.9 ND N 2283 2/24/04 Lot 61 . Village W 269.0 8.4 .126.5 . 93.0 ND N 2284 2/24/04 , Lot60 Village W 264.5 9.2 _. 126.1 92.7 ND N 2285 2/24/04 ' Lot 59 Village W .259.5 8.6 125.4. 92.2 ND .:N 2286 2/24/04 Lot 58 Village W 257.5 8.7 . 132.7 97.6 ND N 2287 2/24/04 Lot 57 . Village W 251.0 8.0 127.0 93.4 ND N 2288 2/24/04 Lot 56 _' Village 247.0 9.4 127.8 94.0 ND N Calavera Hills II, LLC , Calavera Hills II, Village W 1 Ale: C:\exI\tabIes\3400\3459b1.w.ror . GeoSoils inc. W.O. 3459-B1-SG October 2004 Page r TEST .... D X.: X ATE X.: X NO....OR ... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TEST LOCATION ..... ........ .. .. . ........ D.... . VILLAG ..... X. E ELEV X.: EPTh (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY I DENSITY1COMP (pcf) REL ... .... METH................ OD (%).... TEST SOIL TYPE ........... 2289 2/25/04 Lot 36 Village W 223.0 8.9 125.1 92.0 ND N 2290 2/25/04 Lot 38 Village W 224.0 9.2 125.9 92.6 1 ND N 2291 2/25/04 Lot 39 Village 224.0 8.4 128.5 94.5 ND N 2292 2/25/04 Lot 41 Village 218.0 8.6 126.6 93.1 ND N 2293 2/25/04 ' Lot 43 , Village 216.0 9.7 123.6 90.9 ND .N 2294 2/25/04 Lot 44 . Village W 215.0 9.9 122.9 90.4 ND , N 2295 2/25/04 Lot 42 Village 217.0 8.0 123.9 91.1 ND N .2296 2/25/04 Lot 40 Village 222.0 8.4 128.8 94.7 . ND . N 2297 2/25/04. Lots 38 & 39 Village W. 226.0 8.2 _130.8 96.2 ND N 2298 2/25/04 1Lot37 . Village W' 225.0 9.0 - 24.3 91.4 ND: 2299 2/26/04 Front Lots 86 & 87 Village W 209.0 9.9 - 235 90.8 ND N 2300 2/26/04 Front Lot 90 . Village W 206.0 10.2 124.0 91.2 ND - 2301 2/26/04 Front Lot 92 . Village 199.0 .10.3. 124.3 91.4 .ND N 2302 2/26/04 Front Lot 94 .. Village W 200.0 9.8 130.8 96.2 ND 2303 2/26/04 Front Lot 88 VillageW .217.0- 11.2 . 133.8 98.4 - ND N 2304 2/26/04: Front Lot 91 Village W 209.0 10.4 127.4 93.7 . ND N 2305 2/26/04 Front Rec Lot 116 W -Village 201.0 10.1 128.1 94.2 ND .N 2306 2/26/04 Lot 54 Village 240.0. '11'.3 123.6 90.9 . ND N 2307 2/26/04 . Lot 52 - Village 231.0 10.6 123.9 91.1 ND .N 2308 2/26/04 Lot 51 : Village 227.0 10.91 126.8 93.2 ND N. 2309 2/26/04 Lot 53 Village W 236.0 9.8 124.7 91.7 ND N 2310 3/1/04 Lot 84 Village FG 9.9 125.0 91.9 ND N 2311 . 3/1/04 . Lot 85 Village W FG 8.2 . . 131.0 96.3 ND N 2312 3/1/04 Lot 86 . Village FG 8.8 128.1 94.2 ND 2313 3/1/04 Lot 87 Village FG 8.9 128.0 94.1 ND, N. 2314. 3/1/04 Lot 88. Village FG 9.4 126.2 92.8 ND N 2315 3/1/04 Lot 89 . Village FG 10.3 _124.6 91.6 . ND IN 2316 3/1/04 . Lot 90 . Village FG 8.2 _124.0 91.2 ND 'N 2317 3/1/04 . Lot-91 Village W FG 8.1 127.2 93.5 ND 2318 3/1/04 Lot 92 . Village FG. 8.6 _126.5 93.0 ND .N 2319- 3/1/04 . Lot 93 Village FG. ' 8.6 130.2 95.7 ND N 2320 3/1/04 Lot 94 Village FG 8.2 130.8 96.2 ND 2321 3/1/04 ...0t95 Village .FG 8.9 . 128.0 94.1 ND IN 2322 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 27+50 Village W 203.0 T 8.6 . 123.6 90.9 . ND N 2323 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 26+00' Village-W 208.0 . 9.4 . 126.2 92.8 . ND N 2324 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 27+40 Village W 206.0 10.2 128.7 94.6 . ND. N 2325 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 24+00 Village W 210.0 8.8 126.9 93.3 ND 2326 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 26+50 Village W 211.0 1 8.9 128.5 94.5 . -ND-. N 2327 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 25+45 . Village 212.0 .. 9.3 -. 124.8 .91.8' ND N 2328 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 29+10 Village 211.0 ,. 9.2 124.6 916 ND 'N 2329 1. 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 26+40 Village W 218.0 8.4 127.8 94.0 ND .N 2330 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 25+50 Village W 209.0 8.8. 127.4 93.7 -ND • N 2331 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 27+10 Village W 21.1.0 .' 8.7 131.8 96.9 ND .N a- . .. Calavera-Hills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceRtabIL-s\3400\3459bl.w.ror W.O. 34597131-SC October 2004 Page GeoSoils,'Inc. . : TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft MOISTURE CONTENT DRY DENSITY REL COMP TEST METHOD SOIL TYPE 2332 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 24+50 Village W 209.0 8.4 28.0 - 94.1 ND (N 2333 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 26+50 Village 214.0 9.9 123.5 1 90.8 ND N 2334 3/2/04 . Richfield Dr28i-90 Village 212.0 9.2 23.6 - 90.9 ND N 2335 3/2/04 Richfield Dr 28+25 . Village 212.0 10.0 123.9 91.1 ND N 2336 3/3/04 ' Lot 83 Village 225.0 9.9 . 124.8 91.8 ND N 2337 3/3/04 Lot 81 Village W 224.0 110.6 .126.9 93.3 ND .N 2338 3/3/04 Lot 79 Village W 222.0 . 10.2. 127.0 93.4 ND N 2339 3/3/04 ...Ot 77 . Village W. 218.0 8.4 131.6 '96.8 ND N 2340 3/3/04 Lot 75 Village W 215.0. / 9.7 135.2 99.4 ND 'N 2341 3/3/04 Lot-82 . VillageW 226.0 9.1 127.4 93.7 ND 'N 2342 3/3/04 . Lot 80 Village W 224.0 9.9 125.7 92.4 ND 'N 2343 3/3/04. . Lot 78 Village 221.0 10.4 126.3 92.9 ND N 2344 3/3/04 Lot 76 •' Village 217.0 9.3 . 127.6 93.8 ND . 2345 3/3/04' Lot 74 .' Village W 225.0 9.8 "127.4 93.7 '% ND N 2346 3/4/04 Lot 74 Village W 237.0. 9.8 . 1.25.4 92.2 ND - N 2347 3/4/04. . Lot 73 . Village 231.0 .10.2 1'24.8 91.8 . ND 'N 2348 3/4/04 . Lot 73 Village W 230.0 . 9.4 127.3 93.6 ND N. 2349 3/4/04 Lot 73 ' . ' Village W 233.0. .. 9.1 - 127.7 93.9 , ND N 2350 3/4/04 ' Lot 45 . Village 216.0 9.9 126.2 92.8 ND N 2351 3/4/04 . Lot 46 VillageW 217.0. 10.2 126.3 92.9, ND N. 2352 3/4/04 ' Lot 47 ' Village W 219.0 .. 9.1 127.7 93.9 ND N 2353 . 3/4/04 Lot 48 . Village W 220.0 . 9.4 124.3 9.1.4 ND N 2354 3/4/04 . Lot 49 Village W 222.0 . 8.7 .130.3 95.8 ND .F4 2355 3/4/04 Lot 50 Village W 223.0 8.6, 128.1 .94.2 .. ND N 2356 3/4/04 ...t 72 Village W 240.0 9.0 123.9 91.1 . _ND. 'N 2357 3/4/04 Lot 72 Village W 242.0 .8.1 . 123.5 90.8 ND N 2358 3/4/04 MeadowDr33+50t Village W 232.0 _10.9 - 130.4 95.9 ND . N. 2359 3/4/04 Meadow Dr 33+50 Village W 225:0 . 11.3 .131.4 . 96.6 ND . 2360 3/5/04 Lot 36 Village FG 8.8 _127.7 93.9 ND N 2361 3/5/04 . . Lot 37 . Village W FG . 9.2 128.7 94.6 ND. 'N 2362 3/5/04 Lot 38 . Village W FG 9.9 125.4 92.2 ND N 2363 .3/5/04 . Lot 39 . . Village W FG 8.5 1302 95.7 ND N. 2364 3/5/04 . Lot 40 Village FG 8.9 131.6 . 96.8 ND ' N 2365 3/5/04 Lot 41 Village W FG' .8.8 129.3 95.1 ND 2366 3/5/04 . ' Lot 42 . Village W FG 9.0 ' 125.4 92.2 ND N. 2367 3/5/04 ' Lot 43 Village W FG 8.6. 127.4, .93.7 1 ND N 2368 3/5/04 . . Lot 44 . . Village W FG . . 8.7 129.1 94.9 ND' N 2369 3/5/04 Lot 83 . Village W 'FG .10.9 124.4 91.5 .,ND ' N 2370 3/5/04 . Lot 82' Village W FG 11.2 . 135.6 99.7 ND 'N 2371 3/5/04 Lot 81 . - Village W FG'. 10.4 ' 128.2 94.3 . ND' .N 2372 3/5/04 ,.'. . Lot 80 . Village W FG ..9.8 . 131.4 96.6 . ND N, 2373' 3/5/04 Lot 79 . Village W FG 9.9 132.6, 97.5 ND -N 2374 3/9/04 ' Lot 55 ' Village W 'FG . 8.9 126.3 92.9 ND .N -, ' Calavera Hills II, LLC ! ' Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3459bl.w:ror H GeoSoils,. Inc. : W.O. 3459-1311-SC October 2004 Page 11 W.O. 3459-131-SC October 2004 Page 12 (S TabIe,1 FIELDDENSITY TEST RESULTS 2375 3/9/04 Lot 54 Village FG .8.6 128.9, 1 94.8 . ND N 2376 3/9/04' Lot 53 . Village W FG 9.9' . 128.1 94.2 ND N 2377 3/9/04 ' Lot 52 Village W . FG 8.2 127.3 93.6 ND N 2378 3/9/04 Lot 66 Village W FG ' 9.1 127.4 .93.7 . ND .N 2379 3/9/04 ' Lot 67 Village W FG 8.4 127.7 93.9 ND N 2380 3/10/04 Lot 51 ,. Village W FG 8.7 130.3 95.8 ND N 2381 3/10/04 Lot 50 ' Village FG , 8.1 128.0 94.1 ND :N 2382 3/10/04. Lot 49 , Village FG 8.3 \ 128.7 94.6 ND. N 2383 3/10/04 Lot 48 . Village W FG ' 8.0 , 127.2 93.5 ND N 2384 3/10/04 , Lot 47 Village W ' FG 9.6 127.0 93.4 ND N 2385 3/10/04 Lot 46 -- Village W FG , 9.1 127.8' 94.0 ND , N 2386 3/10/04 - Lot 45 Village W FG 8.4 . 127.4 93.7 .ND N 2387 3/11/04 Lot'68 . Village FG 8.2 127.7 93.9 . ND N 2388 3/11/04 Lot 69 , . . Village FG 7.9 . 127.6' 93.8 ND N 2389 3/11/04 Lot 70 , Village W FG - 8.6 130.8 96.2 'ND N 2390 3/11/04 ' Lot 71 Village W FG ' 8.7 128.0 94.1 ND 'N' 2391 3/11/04 ' LOt 78 Village W FG ' 8.2 125.0 91.9 ND 'N 2392 3/11/04 ' . Lot 77 Village W .FG ' 7.9 125.4 92.2 ND. N 2393 3/11/04 Lot 76 Village FG , 7.8 124.8' 91.8 ND .N 2394 3/12/04 ' Lot 74 Village FG , ' 8.2'' 128.1 94.2 ND N 2395 .3/12/04 Lot 75 ' ' , Village W FG .8.1 , 126.5 93.0 ND N 2401 3/18/04 Lot 72 .Village W . FG 8.9 126.6 93.0 ' ND' N: 2402 3/18/04 . Lot 65 '. Village W 268.0 8.2 126.4 94.3 ND J .2432 3/24/04 Richfield Dr 35+50 Village W 253.0 , 11.9 127.3 93.6 ND' 'N 2433 3/24/04. ' Richfield Dr 34+20 Village W 243.0 9.6 '130.3 95.8 ND N- 2434 3/24/04 RichfieldDr 33+00 Village W 233.0 11.4 128.0 94.1, ND ,N 2463 5/24/04 Richfield Dr27+00 ' VillageW 21.8.0 ,. 7.9 123.5 90.8. ND N 2464 5/24/04 Richfield Dr25+00 . Village W 222.0' 8.3 . 122.7 90.2 ND N LEGEND: - * = Indicates Failed Test '. A = Indicates Retest . FG = Finish Grade ND = Nuclear Densometer' SC = Sand Cone I, Calavera Hills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village W File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3459b1'.w.ror GeoSoils, Inc. . - LOT CHARACTERISTICS - CALAVERA'HILLS, VILLAGE W - LOT• EXPANSION INDEX (per UBC . Standard 18.2) . EXPANSION ::`POTENTIAL' SOLUBLE .. SULFATE el ht %) - .• - SULFATE - EXPOSURE DEPTH OF FILL (Range: In Ft.) FOUNDATION CATEGORY 1 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 4-5 - I or I(PT) 2 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-5 I or l(PT) 3 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-4 . I or l(PT) 4, <20 . Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-4 I or l(PT) 5 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-4 I or I(PT). 6 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 34 lorl(PT) 7 <20 Very Low . <0.10 Negligible . 3-4 I or l(PT) 8 <20 yery Low <0.10 Negligible . 3-7 I or l(PT) 9 . . <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 4-10 . I or I(PT) 10 <20 Very Low '. <0.10 Negligible 3-6 I or l(PT) 11 <20 ' Very Low <0.10 Negligible 4-5 I or l(PT) 12 <20 Very Low <0.10 . Negligible ' . 4-8 I or I(PT) 13 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-5 I or I(PT) 14 <20 Very Low '<0.10 Negligible . 4-12 I or I(PT) 15 '- <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 12-29 II or I(PT) 16• <20 Very. Low ' <0.10 Negligible 15-22 II or l(PT) 17 <20 Very Low <0.10 ,. Negligible. 8-24 . II or I(PT) 18 <20 Very Low ,' <0.10 Negligible 12-20 I or I(PT) 19 .. <20 ' Very low .<0.10 ' Negligible 8-18 ' ' Iorl(PT) 20 ., <20 Very low <0.10 Negligible ' ' 8-23 II or I(PT)' . 21 , . <20 Very low' <0.10 Negligible ' 10-15 , I or I(PT) 22 ' . <20 Very low ' '< 0.10 Negligible ' 12-15 1, or I(PT) 23 , ' <20 Very low <0.10 Negligible 6-17 . II or I(PT) 24 . , <20 Very low <0.10 Negligible , 3-9 I or l(PT) 25 , .. , <20', , Very-low <.0.10. - ' Negligible ' "3-4..' I or l(PT) 26 , ' <20 • • Very low • <0.10 ' Negligible 3-4 l,or l(PT) 27 ' , <20 •' . . Very low <0.10 Negligible 3-4 ' . ' I or I(PT) '- 28 ' <20 .. Very' low , <0.10 '' Negligible 3-5 ' I or I (PT) 29 <20 '' , Very low <0.10 ' Negligible ' 3-6 I or I(PT) 30 . • <20 • : Very lOw , : <0.10 Negligible 324 ' I or I(PT) 31 , <20 ' Very low' ' <0.10 • Negligible • 34 • , I or I(PT) 32 <20 , Very low <0.10 ' Negligible 3-5 I or l(PT) Calavera Hills II, LLC • ' ' ' ' • Table 2 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.2.ror • ' - • • Page 1 • ' - ' • ' ' GeoSóils, .Iflc. • -' .1 'S . ,' S. S .' . ,' . . .2. 2/ , ;". : ". j" LOT CHARACTERISTICS- CAVERA HILLS; VILLAGE W :... L 6f EXPANSION ' INDEX (per UBC :.Standard 18-2)"; :,. ' : ::' EXPANSION 2POTENTIAL'!. ." fl..:, ' :, . ' SOLUBLE SULFATE (Weight %) '. • ' ;. . SULFATE '"EXPOSURE'21 - .. DEPTH OF FILL (Range "In'FL). FOUNDATION ''CATEGORY'.'. '33 <20 Very low ' ' <0.10 ' Negligible ' '3-5 • , I or I(PT) 34 . 20 . Very low ' .' < 0.10 . Negligible 3-5': I or I(PI) 35 ' ' ' . <20 Very low , <0.10 . Negligible . ' 3-5 ' , I or I(PT) 36 ' '<20 . ., Very low, <0.10 ' ', Negligible ' 3-5 ' I or I(PT) - 37, . . ' <20 ' Very low <0.10 Negligible . 3-5 , I or l(PT) 38, - <20 " ' Very Low • , <0.1.0 Negligible 3-6 I or l(PT) . 39 ' <20. .. Very Low <0.10 ' Neligible , . ' 4-6' ' ''I or I(PT) 40 , : <20 ' Very Low <0.10 , Negligible ,. ' 3-5 , I or I(PT) 41 . : <20 . ' Very Low ' <0.10 . , Negligible ' 3-4 •' ' ' I or I(PT) . ' 42, , <20 , ' Very Low , <0.10 ' Negligible' , 3-5 •,, I or l(PT) .43 <20 Very Low < 0.10.' Negligible' 4-5 I or I(PT) 44 <20 ' Very Low ' <0.10 ' ' Negligible 4-10 1 o I(PT) 45 ' , . . ' <20 ' Very Low . <0.10 ' Negligible 4-8" ' ' .1 or I(PT) ,46 ' ' , ' <20 ' 'Very Low' ' <0.10 'Negligible , .9-20 I or. I(PT) 47 ' <20 Very Low <0.10, Negligible - 6-18 I or I(PT) 48 : ' ' <20 ' Very Low . '. 0.10 . 'Negligible ' '5-15 -' , ' I or I(PT) 49 ' ' '<20' Very Low <0.10 Negligible 8-14 ' 1 or l(PT) 50 ' . <20 " Very Low ' ' '<0.10 ' Negligible 4-12 I or I(PT). 51 ., ' ' <20 ,VeryLow__' , '< 0.10 Negligible ' 3-9 . ' ' I or l(PT) 52 . ''<20 , : Very Low <0.10 ''Negligible '. , 3-4 ' Iorl(PT) 53 ' , ' ' ' <20: Very Low ' <0.10, Negligible , "lorl(PT)' 54 , <20 Very Low ' ' . <O.10' Negligible _, 3-4 . . :1 or l(PT) - 55 ' <20 . . Very Low ' '<0.10 Negligible., , 3.4 ' ' .'Iori(PT).- 56 <20 Very. Low . _<0.10 . Negligible .3-4 , " _IorI(PT) 57* <20 ' Very Low , . <0.10 . Negligible ' 34 ' 'I or I(PT)' .58 '. ' ' ' <20 'Very Low , <'0.10 ,Negligible•: '3-4 I or I(PT).. 59'' . <20 "Very Low ' <0.10 .. Negligible '. ., '3.4 l.or I(PT) 60 ' '.. ,''<20 •' Very Low . <0.10 Negligible ' 3-4 , ' I or l(PT) 61 ' ' , <20 ' ' Very Low ' '<O.lO.' , Negligible ' 3-4' '' I or I(PT) 62 ' ' _<20 . . ' Very Low : <0.10 ' . Negligible 3-4 1 or l(PT) '63 ., ' <20 Very Low ' <0.10 ." Negligible ' 3-4 • '.Ior.l(PT) 64_- _'." , ' <20 ' ' Very Low ' <'0.10: Negligible ':3.4.,, 1orl(P'1) -.65 ' , <20 • . ., Very Low , <0.10.'' Negligible , , ' . I or l(PT) • 66 '.' . ' <20 , .' ' - Very Low , <0.10 Negligible 4-8 •, ' I or I(PT) 67 <20 _,• Very'Low <010' ' 'Negligible ' 3-5 - I or l(PT) Calavera Hills H, LLC ' •' . ' . , .' ' . , 1 , . ' Table 2 '. File e \wp9\340\3459b1 2 ror Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. LOT CHARACTERISTICS CALAVERA HILLS, VILLAGE W *'.LOT T':'' EXPANSION"' INDEX (per UBC Standard 18-2) : .' :;. ,"" EXPANSION ,,'POTENTIAL"' . ' . SOLUBLE SULFATE WeIght %)' . : .' ',. SULFATE "EXPOSURE OF FILL (Range In Ft.)' DEPTH FOUNDATION ' CATEGORY ' 68 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 4-8 I or i(PT) 69 .' , '<20 Very Low <0.10 ' Negligible 7-21 .1 or I(PT) - <20 ' ' ' Very Low <0.10, Negligible. 16-20. IorI(PT) 71 ' <20, Very-Low <0.10 ,' Negligible 13-16 ' j or l(PT) 72 '. ' <20 , ,, Very Low , <0.10 Negligible' . 1245 I or I(PT)' 73 <20 '' Very Low' , <0.10 Negligible ,' 3-6 ' , I or, I(PT) : 74 ' '<20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-9. , I or I(PT). 75 ' , ' <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible 3-4 1 or I(PT) 76 ' <20 . ' Very Low " <0.10 -.. Negligible , 3-4 ' , I or I(PT) 77 <20 ' Very Low <0.10 ' Negligible ' 4-5 , I or I(PT) 78 ' , '' <20 , ' ' ' Very Low , <'0.10 ' Negligible ' ' 3-4 ' ' I or I(PT) 79 i <20 , , Very Low -,< 0:10 Negligible 3-4 I or l(PT) 80' ' , <20 ' ' Very Low , <0.10 Negligible 3-4 I or I(PT) 81 ' ' ' '<20 . ' Very Low <0.10: 'Negligible 3-4 I or I(PT) ' 82 <20' , ' Very Low <0.10 . ' Negligible ; 3-4 I or I(PT) 83-1.<20 ' Very Low ' <0.10 ' Negligible 3-4 . ' l.orl(PT) 84, ' <20 ', Very Low ' <0.10 , . Negligible ' 34 ' , I or-I(PT) 85 <20 .' Very Low <0.10 . Negligible . 3-4 I or I(PT)' 86 , , '<20: ' . ./ery Low . ' <0.10 Negligible 3-4 " I or I(PT) <20 ,'Very Low' ., <0.10 ' 'Negligible , ' 3-4 I or l(PT) 88 ', , <20 Very Low <'0.10 :Negligible 3-4 ' , I or I(P1) 89 '. ' ' <20 ,Very Low ' <0.10 . , Negligible' , 3-4 I or I(PT) 90 ' ' <20 .' ,__'Very Low , <0.10 " 'Negligible , 3-4 ' I or I(PT) ' 91 ' . ' ' ' <20 ".Very Low <0.10 Negligible '3-4 I or I(PT) 92 '. ' ' , <20 ', ' , ' Very Low , <'0.10 ' Negligible 3-4 'I or I(PT) ' . 93 : <20 , Very Low '<0.10" 2 Negligible ' 3-4 ' ., I or I(PT) 94 '' ' •. <20_' . Very Low <0.10 ' Negligible ' , 3-5 . " I'or I(PT) 95 ' , <20: ,,, ,: Very Low' ' <0.10' ' Negligible ' 3-5 ' ' I or I(PT) 96 , ., <20 , Very Low ' <0.10' ' Negligible 3-5' ' I or !(PT) 97 '<20 , , , Very Low <0.10 Negligible ,' 3-4 'I or I(PT) 98 ' ' <20 ' Very Low <0.10. , Negligible 3-4' I or, (PT) 99 . ', , <20 Very Low ., <b.10 . Negligible ' 3-4 ' I or I(PT) 100 , <20, ',: Very Low 0.12 ' Moderate 3-4' , ' I orl(PT) 101: , <20. ' :" Very Low ' 0.12 - Moderate ' , 3-4 . ' , I or I(PT)' '102 , . <20 '' , Very Low , 012 ' ' Moderate - 34 ' I or l(PT), Calavera Hills II, LLC 'fl . ' . , Table 2 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.2.ror . 'flY - ' ' ' ' - " ' Page, 3 GeoSoils, Inc. J - I . ;. . LOT CHARACTERISTICS - CAVERA HILLS, VILLAGE W... • •y LOT... - ?.: EXPANSION INDEX (per UBC Standard 18-2) • EXPANSION POTENTIALt : SOLUBLE SULFATE (Weight %) - SULFATE EXPOSUREt DEPTHS OF FILL (Range In Ft.) • FOUNDATION CATEGORY ') 103 <20 - Very Low 0.12 Moderate 3-4 I or I(PT) 104 <20 Very Low . 0.12 Moderate 3-4 I or I(PT) 105 <20 Very Low 0.12 Moderate 34 I or l(PT) - 106 <20 Very Low 0.12 Moderate . 3-4 I Or I(PT) 107 . <20 Very Low . . 0.12 Moderate 3-4 I or l(PT) 108.. <20 Very Low: . 0.12 Moderate. - 5-6 IorI(PT) 109 . <20. Very Low <0.10 Negligible 7-19 . I or I(PT) .110 <20 Very Low. <01O Negligible 4-10 Ior.l(PT) 111 <20 Very Low <0.10 Negligible; 6-12 lorl(PT) 112 ,. <20 •: Very Low <0.10 Negligible 7-11 I or I(P1) 113 1 . <20 Very Low. < 0.10 Negligible . 4-11 I or l(PT) 114 .. <20 Very Low <0.10. Negligible 3-8 lorl(PT) 115 (recreation lot): . <20 • Very Low..<O.10 .. Negligible • '• .13-15 -_________ * _______________ 117 • (recreation lot) .. - <20 • - • . Very Low <0.10 • • Negligible • 20-25 . • * . Per Table 18-I-B of th Uniform Building Code (1997 ed.) •. - • •• • . (2)Per Table 19-A-4 of the Uniform Building Code (1997 ed.).. •-. . . • Foundations should be constructed in accordance with recommendations for the specific categories noted above and presented in the text of this report (PT recommendations) and Table 3. - • . • * To be provided based on precise grading plan review • . . ( . MINIMUM INTERIOR INtERIOR UrbER- .--. GARAGE - EXTERIOR FOUNDATION FOOTING SLAB REINFORCING SLAB SLAB SLA FLATWORK CATEGORY SIZE THICKNESS STEEL REINFORCEMENT TREATMENT - REINFORCEMENT REINFORCING I 12 Wide 4" Thick 1- #4 Bar Top and #3 Bars @ 2 Sand Over 6"x6" None x - - Bottom 24 O.C. 1 0-Mil Polyvinyl (10/10) 12 Deep - Both Directions Membrane Over . WWF .. . 2 Sand Base II 12 Wide 47 Thick ?- #4 Bars Top and #3 Bars @ 2 Sand Over 6 x 6 6 x 6 x Bottom 18 O.C. 10-Mil Polyvinyl (6/6) (10/10) 18" Deep - . Both Directions Membrane Over WWF WWF 2 Sand Base III 12 Wide -.4 ".Thick 2- #5 Bars Top and...#3 Bars @ 2 Sand Over Same as 6 x 6 x Bottom 18 o.c. 10-Mil Polyvinyl Interior Slab (6/6) 24 Deep - - - Both Directions Membrane Over WWF -... - . . 2 Sand Base Category Criteria Category I Max Fill Thickness is less 11 thari Wend Expansion Index is less than or equal to 50 and Differential Fill Thickness is less than 10 (see note 1) Category II Max Fill Thickness is less than 50 and Expansion Index is less than or equal to 90 or Differential Fill Thickness is between 10 and 20 (see note 1) Category III Max Fill Thickness exceeds 50 Expansion index exceed190 but is less than 130 Differential Fill Thickness exce'eds 20 (see note 1) Notes I Post tension (PT) foundations are required where maximum fill exceeds 50 the ratio of the maximum fill thickness to the minimum fill thickness exceeds 3:1 Consideration should be given to using post tension foundations where the expansion index exceeds 90 2 Footing depth measured from lowest adjacent subgrade 3 Allowable soil bearing pressure Is 2,000 PSF 4 Concrete for slabs and footings shall have a minimum compressive strength of 2,000 PSI (2500 PSI for exterior flatwork) or adopted UBC min., at 28 days using 5 sacks of cement Maximum Slump shall be -Y. 5 Visqueen vapor barrier not required under garage slab However, consideration should be given to future uses of the slab area such as room conversion and/or storage of moisture sensitive materials 6 Isolated footings shall be connected to foundations per soils engineer's recommendations (see report) 7 Sand used for base under slabs shall be very low expansive and have SE > 30 8 Additional exterior fiatwork recommendations are presented in the text of this report 9 All slabs should be provided with weakened plane joints to control cracking Joint spacing should be in accordance with correct industry standards and reviewed by the project structural engineer. / - APPENDIX*,".4 I .3 3. 1 - REFEREISICES . . . . ... , I . 3 -3 3 S 1 - .4 ( 4 .3 4 5. 11 4 I S 3 t .3 3. I i s 3. 5 .14 4- I S S I I ... S / S .3 .: j-,.. ',,:-.. . .:.. •.- -.. . .. 1 1 3 .... S APPENDIX REFERENCES California Building Standards Commission, 2001, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2, Adopted November 1, 2002. Davidson Reinforcing Company, 2003, Post-tension foundation plans, notes, and details for "Summerhouse,"Carlsbad, Ca., Sheets CVR, PTD, PT1,PT1-1 through PT1-3, PT2, PT2-1, P13, and PT3-1,Job Na..1610, print dated October. 21. GeoSoils, Inc , 2004a, Review of liquefaction potential, Village W of Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad, California, W.O. 4254-B-SC, dated April 6. 2004b, Pavement Design Report Calavera. Hills II, Village W (Summerhouse), City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 4254-E7SC, dated March 5 2004c, Geotechnical update and review of foundation plans, Calavera Hills II, Village W, (Summerhouse), City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, WO. 3459 W-C-SC, dated February 24 2004d, Interim report of rough (mass) grading, model Lots 16 through 19, Calavera Hills II, Village W, Carlsbad Tract 01-05, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W 0 4254-B-SC, dated February 26 2003a, Toe Drain Recommendations, Calavera Hills II, Village W, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 3459-Bi -SC, dated October 15 2003b, Supplemental evaluation of allowable bearing value, Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California," W.0. 3459-B1-SC, dated July 1 2003c, Memorandum:.general discussion of fill quality, Calavera Hills II, Carlsbad, California, W 0 3459-B2-SC, dated May 20 2003d, Recommendations regarding sideyard drainage swales, Villages E-1, H, K, L-2, U, W, X, Y, and Z, Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County,: California, W.0. 3459-B1-SC, dated June 18 2002, Review of grading and trench backfill recommendations, Calavera Hills II, Carlsbad tract 00-02 Drawing 390790, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 2863-A-SC, August 16 2001, Preliminary geotechnical evaluation, Calavera Hills II, College Boulevard and Cannon Road Bridged and Thoroughfare District No 4 (B&TD), City of Carlsbad, California, W 0 2863-A-SC, dated January 24 1999, Update of geotechnical report, Calavera Hills, Village W, City of Carlsbad, California," W.0. 2750-A-SC, dated October 22 GeoSoils, Inc. GeoSotls, Inc. I'//'IX..//'/)X/" ,.) I / I / I I / 1 • / 4. .' , I ,• . 1 '•• •'-• / I j l 1 /•/• /•'• _.•'••• •/• 7/ ;/ .. 4 .,i._.— ( I f / , / ,1 ' / •, 4 '4j< ,// - • )/ /1 / 1/ / I•.' I rl -- .f/ / 4 .•/, -,.. '., ! I ._1 • / .y /1 .I/ . .•..... \ 12 m I I ) V / / : - I / / ' c ' • / 1 J / • I : if I // 1 / 1 / •1 •' / I / ': ' - ----- / I • . •prØi -mat e•1oation of subdrain, with - ; - N rrcw IncbcttIhg direction of flow Appto,,ate iocation pf fQO tlrAin, with ow IiØitifl dirtion of1 : ..•.:. \\• .': • ........ .. .... :•. • • ::......... ..\ 0. EAEEHENTS t : j . . . .• •. •..,•... ,. ••. . ..... .. ••. •• ...• [fl A PIPELINE EASEMENT IN PA VOR OF 0EANSI0E MUTUAL WATER COMPANY (ACQUIRED BY CARLSBAD Mi/NIC/IPAL WA 11.7? 0/SIR/CT) RECORDED dilL Y II, 1930 IN BOOK 1796, PACE 742 OF DEEDS A 1501 ELECTRiCITY TRAI/SM/SS/0N EASEMENT TO SOW RECORDED il/NE 1 I \ \ \ \ \4 1953/N BOOK 4874, PACE 143 OP OFF/C/Al RECORDS 21 7 i •I ' l I \ \ 1A2'4'2 Ci,, 4 I \ \ \ \ \ J A 20' TREE TRiMMiNG EASEMENT TO SDG&E RECORDED JUNE 1, 1953/N BOOK ,ti / \•%.\ l"\ / 142 \ \ 4874, PACE 143 OF OFF/O1AL RECORDS \\cl \ GENERAL PLAN \ \ \ \ / ' OF/V siz c L1 AN EASEMENT FOR CABLE TELEWSION IN FAVOR CF DAN/2S OF ANY) / f CABLEWS/0N 11V0 RECORDED SEP 26, 1990 AS FILE IV'Q 90-526048 OF J ' r \ OFFICIAL RECORDS lifE ROUT OR LCCA I16W CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM SAID INSTRUMENT (THIS CASEMENT IS 81AWT IN NA AIRE). \. ': • • 1A ... •. .\••; \I I 45 - 4.. 4 qPE LI1 AN EASEMENT FOR C"EN SPACE OVER, UPON, ACROSS AND UNDER LOT 122 PER MAP NO 14541. IC 5 \ II %<, MOTE Z/ ELECTROMC DATA FILES ARE AOR REFERENCE OIVL V AIVO ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR HORIZONTAL OR YER110AL SURVEY CONTROL 0( DESIGNED BY: U. DATE: DESCRIPTION: STANDARD M-10 STREET 661VITRUIVI, DRAWN BY: BO D, NC SCALE: 1 = 40 HEIL MONUMENT PROJECT MGR 00 JOB N 98-1020 LOCATION CENTERLINE OF EL CM/NO REAL NO 60223 • C 0 N S U L T T S • • • P.E. EXP. DATE ATENQINEER'S51A170N454#92 • EXP. 6/30/04 2710 Laker Avenue West Civil Engineerin9 ENGINEER OF WORK: • • • • • • •• —•••••• •• - PER R.S 18001 * * Suite 100. Pjanning . • . REVIEWED BY: • Carlebad, California 92008 Processing / 760-931-7700 Surveying or -Fax: 766~931-8680 A~~ RECORD FROM COUNTY BENCH LEt/ELS (No COUNTY I'ERT IVIL E DATE /1/q43 _____________ ONTR0L DATA,) • • K W HANSEN . RCE: 60223 INSPECTOR • DATE ELEVATION: 68.479 .OAT/JM/ US C. & 0S. SHEET CITY OF CARLSBAD SHEETS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1 0 ____ ____________________________ GRO/rn7 PLANS FOR MYM '/US 1/ iUAQ( 'w NORTHERN MOST PORT/ON ____ ____ — ___• .__ ___ _____ • i_________________________________ • IAPPROVED8r LLOYD B. HUBBS J493. tP 23889VEXPIRE 12-31-05 CITY ENGINEER DATE • _____________________________________ ______ ____ _____ _____ ______• _____ • • 5.I iO1 A R.r'V i . T'/ ON L/O5 DWN BY PROJECT NO DRAWING NO CHKD BY VP DATE INITIAL • DATE INITIAL • DATE INITIAL EER OF WORK REVISION DESCRIPTION OTHER APPROVAL' CITY APPROVAI RVWD BY: 0. T. 01-0,5 408--qA .T S S • 1 •SS - S .S - - — ST. S . RIVERSIDE CO. S S S S S S S ORANGE CO__ ' ';; LL / , 7 II 1 _ _ _ S S I L. F EL D DENSITY TEST V 2132 "?/Th ,,, N // ' /11 \ ' / I i / ' ' ' I ' /rO 7\ N{ \ / f ? 2 ' / / / / / A PiP/i wr E45E4/FNT /1/ A VOJ? OF OCFANS/or 4i/I144f If4 ire? (1P4NY 458-131-SC AT 10/04 SCALE 1"-40 AO5 ''' .D' ' ' ' / I K I I t '4(4Q/i'/P/D tiY OAI?i$C40 iWlIMO//PAI IJ4TrR D/S7FVC,,) RECORDED c1JLY II, \ \\ \ o 'N — JI 'I / / Ic / / g /1 I CMII WS/C INC /WTWOO EP ' 11O AS i/II Na 90-526046 OF k \ \ \ ' , . N / / , / / 4 i A' .2 / / 1 1/ 1 ,j-rJii i nrwp riir nii ir irn i,v i n'i , w in r nr r4rrr4 /J ,rr. , -- S _S - - — SSS • 41 S S . . S. .J // I ' / / / 1S 4' . / a : S Sj f%.1/1V/ U$(S. (IVVH VR i.VLP iIVf ((V&f P L'L (tjiMiIVtLJ IFUII 2 / 7' / qQE ' /4' 1 / II? 28 / 1)1 , / / SVD INSTRt'MF//T (1W/s rAsEMwr IS u'Nc'ET iN A'tll//) 'b.111, ii K/99n 1 / •I / . .5.. J• S //jJ2 / •S / '-A'/8cs / I / / 444 I' 5 S / PER b4P Ak2 /4511. , I, / / . / \ ./ J .jSS S S S p -, /1 i A'- / 97, / P / / I / // - I' 'LLE 'V. . s ./: . / . /47: 5 ..1 f': S ' / / / ,,J// 555 : S : :' ,' \. \9 7q1 ç •• / // // L G ,r952 1 / " 1/Cat$4i. PLiW ,7// I /i / / (f/ aov SPA( \\ \ /8pj L -y /995,A /1 Y67f \ \ jrRo! ( \ ' '9i /1 \ / ,1 ) 'c / ,' IA'-.6/a I I / / —•---*—.---- S 'S••S. - S S ,t/• . S / / LoTi .5 \ S S --.----- S S . S S / --. S S S .....S •-- \ S S S / Ii NO 60223 —._N_iL S EXP. 6/30/04 2710 Lokr Av/mu CrIbcd, CQiirRi 2 S 14E1 CAL' Fmi: 760-0i1 —fl S i -.". / : \\\\\\ .-z:c1/,.\ \il , \/( (a / S - rn— — \\ \ \\\\ /I\\/ I \\- \\ \ t'',7" \\ .:. '10' 20' 10' SILALE 1 40' tU\\ • -L, I S \k\ \ 1 __,1_jL5 \ \ \ , ii '• '4 Ii I cf \ ,, .• \ ... S . .. \\ • • S S - - : / \\ a BID \ / 181$ \\ \ \ /4 / \ ' \ -' j I \\ / 1 / \\ S ,/T.. 't q38 SM" .• S. SS .• /5, ••. S•5 — L \ 2 4?8 / " I - / / = \a 'I' / / 529 I / / * I 1 _____ _______ S -L 9 / . '\ 1 PROJLCI MGR JO3 NO — - 'ECPfPTI01J s1/'LT OEiVTER/llVr _____ ____ ________ ________ _______ ____ ______ grIflg ENGIWEIr or I — C I XP — _______ 1DAE L0A1I0N OFNIfR1/A14 17 rIW'NO R&41 ________ ______ ____ S - R. -------- , 4TrA'(SYN/?S SZflON 454+92 . ____ S REVIEWED BY: S S RS 1800-1 ____ ________ ___ ___ ____ ________ IDATE ELEVATION: 6&4? DA1 & ___ S S 55 '5 --*IY- PN4*'#Pa.* _____ ____ ___ ____ ___ SOUTHERFI POR?ION _____ 1APPROVED6i —5— —S - -___ _______ __________ _____ - •iL it,UQ ..J31!BS j :1 i.Ar INTAL REVISIONJ DESCRIPTION — - DATE - flllTlAL DATE TAL 5 C11Y ______ ____ _______ _____ I PE t2-3-05 CTT' FNGINTR DAr ____ __ ___ ___ T O1-O5 j oa-4 ____ S 5 44* ,,S,__,,, •J{ S [1 rir rA1 T1 [I.1 L4 ____ ENGINEERUIG DEPARTMENT _,J f I U j - "-----.---.-rn-,-.._._._ S - _.5T 5 I:555__ S ?MMQ P4WA IVI? C4M14 /111151/ WII4Q( ' ___ ____ S ____ _____ ____ I __________ _____ OWN B: flR0JEO115IWNGNO ___ ___ 4 ' ______ S 55 5555 SSSS SSSSSSSSSSSS - ..s' - 'S SS . -- 1Ts'5 -rr S - IS . SSS .S SS 55555 55555555 55S555.5 5 55555 555 5555555555555 S SSS,.SS5S 55555 55555 55 555 •S 5555 55 555SSS S 5.5 555555 5555 SSSS S"SSSSSSSSSS,S.SSSSS SSS• 555 5 555 S5SSSSS • 5S55 5s5 55 S SSSSSS S 555. 555 4, 5 STITS. SSS_ 55555 ------------5555555555 5_5555 •S S —. 5•5555_ S t / I' X2/2 \ \ \ : 9F9, \\ \ 2322 34kP \t\ \ L I LO CAT 0 N MAP To Kg j ni v' \\;y\ \ m a ' \c K2259 / / I I I / \ \ \ \ /\ \ X \\ ii I' \\ K m J10 , / / 11 / / 1 #t Ii / / 7 1 / / / 1 / I' / / / / / / // / 7/ \ç -w1: 4\ 01 jj ' A223 //N7 ) 1K r/Jm I / / D/Sll?/C REc?r'w 1' Y 1/ - \ ( \\ '-'s- I — - — * - I\ '1 K22 / / crs iw RCW)D EP 2 19W AS FILE No 1O4I 01 -' \ -\____ ' a f ,t2/ -'k. !' i ,zc 41 '" " ''- 1 P L I / 2I " I / / 11 / / SAIO /iVS7RMttF/VT (TI/IS' 14SfTNT IS Iii AN/(ET IV /14 WR) - \ 11 Ti 1/ /b / I — 25 -r 1 — i I \\\ $\\ \ 12J \ ,/ 4J / / / PRP0SES PER L1P 11511 G I ' B i B 23 U I / r \ ..\ \ \ 42/3 \/\L c. '/i' I 1LW \ 4/4 / / 1 / .. : /: / . __ ______ ________- - .---. -. - — .. •; T NO 6O22ip ___ ____ ____ __ DATL ___ ___ ___ ,-,... 1 it a I xrix Eli TTT:TTITTT 1_.T TT: ::T: EEl I ___ __ _TJT X1 EzI_ )ATE INFIlAL DATE tNiflAt.. DATE NTIAL - EN.GNEf.R I REVSON DESCRIPTION ..-..-.--*•-***- ---- .c4.$J1 øESlGNft DY _JC DATE JOU2 ____________ ______ ____ DESCRUfloN: ST4NDAR9 &f-W S?7'EE7' CENTERLINE WUL fOiV1ifENT I ___ _______* ___ ---- ___ ______ _____ ____ ___ LOCAThDN: CE/Vi fINE 01 fl £Wf//VO REAL AT rMv Rc STA iiav 454-1-92 PER RS 18O0-1 RECORD FROM: c0iWTY &MY/ LE'LS (W2 OULINTY VERT CONTROL 1)414) 58479 OTh LiSI1 2S. )f'lY/U' j:i j 2710 Lor ENCINEIR 0F WORV S . Cirt"k4 Pornk' I2OL0 i / 4 , / 7o0—!S1--77O0 LVFYfl4 C*_•_— DAT -_____________ * RCE:.&-2 INSPECTOR •. ______ OATh -. .... r T ri I L2_J DEPARTMET J LII' -W!2WG PLANS FCW $L44RA i/ILLS 1/ WII4Q! 'W j- - CWTER PORTION APPRO — -' - -i- . tfLLO UWIP.. 1 P 23&3 iXHRII 12-%I---O5 CITY ENGINEER DE - OWN BY: I PROJECT NO, DRAWING NO. i L I_' -05 f0$4 - 5._I '-: - -- -.... 1 S - - _**_ . -. - e r - - - — - I J I I : i I I N RIVEROIDE 00, SAN DIEGO CO. FIELD DERSITY TEST P1 A2_q 77 1(9 See Plate I for legend -1179 AJU 195d 3 1201 47 r! j~y taf t 4 1 91( 97 EG I I I I A PlELht t4LENT / FA 01 0CNWE iJ,A/ P1t1R ciWr Din\ 94571p, W. wacvro jy; 150' 7P11 tAt 0F 190 W 80 POF 143 or" offloll?t 166100s. Z9, 7/ VA 5 /44 3 17,5 I 1 Lii 1w iisritvi FOR cair n'oi' /V ZW 0 D4Nf/ 4NY 7 a f loirz 61'71 4541. 58 /in v II256W 7RA11. 0010A 71-0 TO tH~4--_ Pu , /0 Pa.) OT 01-05 'Ag 00 2,28 ( K9 .77 .27 TL04 2 0. 0 0 29 2150 1 i '° . / ) i ; ) I ; ] •M ' f/I! ! 219, or 9,3 60 749 21 Z-79 gr/ J 7A 0 jm 27J 5 le 71 2542 40 'a -WAIF a Y 0-1i r ro IL 10 it rl'a-'K I.. V 41 1.7r, ri A? i~ 40~, 10, r. Me x V A 7,51 ;'5`1 S 4XI :affor % mo 41. / / c'/ /0ff 0• 2ZC \ \ \t1 I 0 0 N . \. 0 0 0 _ SN ) DY j( D TE DSCR1PflUt 1M2, W 41- /P TRICi W/TER//NF r DRAWN nv _ffi DJC SCALE: J _Jfl__ RM I PROJECT MO _ JOB NO LJfl2Q - ___— IXCATIOU erNlr.RLINF 2L ri I4i/N0 R/W fI-I (3Q9) ç C 0 N S U L I_M N I S — P C EXP.___* DATE 4TENCWE7?'S siiiav 454+9I Ir AM) ARC NOT TO 5E USED IV)? /V'/ZOTh1/ Crbid, CThforrk WQO1 Prt nç REVIEWED RECORD FROM CW/Ifl'1tW(/f lilt/S (\4 COUNTY IfRT760-931-7700 suwcy1n(j VFRIICII4I SURY COWAN! ) '1 I4 411 1 - r o41 "00- 0• InrVAT1 AT 1iiTEE CITY II1 r J.L.I1W 'JãL Liti) LJL_J L E!t!iENT U) NQW/$tW PORTA2'V F 0 0• r I APPROVEDV . • V 1fi I PL ItT/ CXP £12-.S1-05 CITY ENGINEER L)A. U T1'(T1 EPROJECT iö'1 [1V1NG1O CHKDBY*'ILJ 111 1W 1/WIIII ttC,014W11 fl4211/*I*IW VflWtW1wIW/IllH9IW 1In1nI.W* I'I ØWnI!W1$IIW& I W.I*SflWWIWW?I01w*I *tIW*,UWfl.. iiI_ LJJL oil DATE IN1FtAL 0 RE:vIsioN DESCRIPTION c,m.n%aqa.s, DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL* 0 RCiE - [ NSPCTQR DATE C [VAI1ON 4 14 Th (IS C 0.S ENFE XI.1W4 _ OTHER APPROVAL 0 CITY AFP OVAL - -• .:0i: —.